Cambridge 1 Corinthians Commentary
1 Corinthians
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
General Editor:—J. J. S. PEROWNE, D.D.,
Bishop of Worcester.
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE
CORINTHIANS,
EDITED WITH NOTES AND INTRODUCTION
by
THE REV. J. J. LIAS, M.A.,
RECTOR OF EAST BERGHOLT, AND CHANCELLOR OF LLANDAFF CATHEDRAL.
Stereotyped Edition
Cambridge:
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
1896
[All Rights reserved.]
CORINTH & THE ENVIRONS
PREFACE
BY THE GENERAL EDITOR
The General Editor of The Cambridge Bible for Schools thinks it right to say that he does not hold himself responsible either for the interpretation of particular passages which the Editors of the several Books have adopted, or for any opinion on points of doctrine that they may have expressed. In the New Testament more especially questions arise of the deepest theological import, on which the ablest and most conscientious interpreters have differed and always will differ. His aim has been in all such cases to leave each Contributor to the unfettered exercise of his own judgment, only taking care that mere controversy should as far as possible be avoided. He has contented himself chiefly with a careful revision of the notes, with pointing out omissions, with suggesting occasionally a reconsideration of some question, or a fuller treatment of difficult passages, and the like.
Beyond this he has not attempted to interfere, feeling it better that each Commentary should have its own individual character, and being convinced that freshness and variety of treatment are more than a compensation for any lack of uniformity in the Series.
CONTENTS
I. Introduction
Chapter I. Corinth. Its Situation and History
Chapter II. The Corinthian Church
Chapter III. Date, Place of Writing, Character and Genuineness of the Epistle
Chapter IV. Doctrine of the Resurrection
Chapter V. Analysis of the Epistle
II. Notes
III. General Index
IV. Index of Words and Phrases explained
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER I
Corinth. Its Situation And History
At the time of the Apostle’s visit, Corinth was the most considerable city in Greece. Its commercial importance had always been great. Situated on a narrow neck of land between two seas[1]—the far-famed Isthmus—the temptations to prefer commerce to war, even in times when war was almost the business of mankind, proved irresistible to its inhabitants. The command of the Isthmus was no doubt important in a military point of view; but at a time when navigation was difficult and dangerous[2], the commercial advantages of the position were enormous. Merchants arriving either from the East or from the West, from Italy or Asia Minor, could save themselves the risk of a hazardous voyage round the Peloponnesus, and found at Corinth both a ready market for their wares, and a convenient means of transport. Corinth, therefore, had always held a high position among the cities of Greece[3], though the military genius of Sparta and the intellectual and political eminence of Athens secured to those two states the pre-eminence in the best periods of Greek history. But in the decline of Greece, when she had laid her independence at the feet of Alexander the Great, the facilities for trade enjoyed by Corinth gave it the first place. Always devoted to the arts of peace, in such a degree as to incur the contempt of the Lacedæ-monians[4], it was free, in the later times of the Greek republics, to devote itself undisturbed to those arts, under the protection, for the most part, of the Macedonian monarchs. During that period its rise in prosperity was remarkable. It had always been famous for luxury, but now it possessed the most sumptuous theatres, palaces, temples, in all Greece. The most ornate of the styles of Greek architecture is known as the Corinthian. The city excelled in the manufacture of a peculiarly fine kind of bronze known as Corinthian brass[5]. Destitute of the higher intellectual graces (it seems never, since the mythic ages, to have produced a single man of genius) it possessed in a high degree the refinements of civilization and the elegancies of life. It was regarded as the “eye[6],” the “capital and grace[7]” of Greece. And when (b.c. 146) it was sacked by Mummius during the last expiring struggle of Greece for independence, though it was devoted to the gods, and not allowed to be rebuilt for a century, its ruins became the “quarry from which the proud patricians who dwelt on the Esquiline or at Baiae, adorned their villas with marbles, paintings, and statues[8].”
[1] Ovid (Met. v. 407) and Horace (Od. 1. 7. 2) call it bimaris Corinthus.
[2] Cape Malea, now St Angelo, was “to the voyages of ancient times, what the Cape of Good Hope is to our own.” Conybeare and Howson. Vol. I. ch. 12.
[3] Corinth early founded colonies, of which the most famous were Syracuse in Sicily, and Corcyra, known to the Italians as Corfu, but still retaining in Greek its ancient name Κέρκυρα.
[4] Plut. Apophth. Lac Agis son of Archidamus, vi.
[5] Some writers have supposed this aes Corinthiacum to have been the gold, silver and brass melted down in the conflagration which followed the taking of the city by Mummius. But this, which seems intrinsically improbable, is refuted by the fact that the Corinthian brass was well known before the destruction of Corinth. See note in Valpy’s Edition on the passage quoted below from Florus, and Smith’s Dictionary of Antiquities.
[6] Cicero pro Man_1:5.
[7] Florus 11. 16. 1.
[8] Stanley, Introduction to 1st Corinthians, p. 2. Rome, says Strabo (viii. 6. 23), was filled with the spoils of the sepulchres of Greece, and especially with the terra cotta vases which were found there. Every tomb, he adds, was ransacked to obtain them.
The colony (Julia Corinthus) founded here by Julius Caesar in b.c. 46 soon restored the city to its former greatness. The site had lost none of its aptitude for commerce. The city rose rapidly from its ruins. The Roman proconsul of Achaia fixed his seat there (Act_18:12). Merchants once more, as of old, found the convenience of the spot for the transport or disposal of their wares, and in the early days of the Roman Empire Corinth became, as of old, a bye-word for luxury and vice. “Non cuivis homini contingit adire Corinthum[9]” has passed into a proverb, which is also found in the Greek language[10], and which at once points to Corinth as a wonder of the world, and as a place which no man should dare to visit without an ample command of money. The worship of Aphrodite, which had given Corinth an infamous pre-eminence over other cities[11], was restored[12], and Corinth once more became a hotbed of impurity. And though the names of many of its residents indicate a Roman origin, there can be no doubt that the supple and astute Greek, who had become a prominent feature of Roman society even in the capital[13], had re-occupied the city, and gave the tone to the general character of its life. Greek philosophy was then in its decline, and it is to Greek philosophy in its decline that we are introduced in the Epistles of St Paul. Endless logomachies[14], personal vanity and rivalries[15], a disposition to set intellectual above moral considerations[16], a general laxity of manners and morals[17], a preference of individual convenience to the general welfare1[18], a tendency to deny the idea of a future life, and to give oneself up to unlimited enjoyment in this1[19], appear to have been the chief difficulties with which St Paul had to contend in planting the Gospel at Corinth. These were in part the characteristics of Roman society in general; but some of the features in the picture are peculiar to Greece1[20].
[9] Horace, Ep. 1. 17. 36.
[10] Strabo viii. 6. 20. The proverb was applied to Corinth both before and after the sack by Mummius.
[11] The word Corinthian was synonymous with profligacy in ancient times, as it afterwards, by a classical allusion, became in the days of the Regency and of George 4. in our own country.
[12] A thousand priestesses dedicated to her licentious worship existed at Corinth, and it was the custom to signalise special occasions of triumph by setting apart fresh victims to this infamous superstition.
[13] Juvenal, Sat, iii. 76–78.
[14] 1Co_1:17; 1Co_2:13.
[15] ch. 1Co_3:21, 1Co_4:6-7, 1Co_5:6; 2Co_10:12 (according to the received text), 1Co_11:12.
[16] 1Co_5:2.
[17] 1Co_5:11, 1Co_6:9-10.
[18] 10 ch. 6–13.
[19] 1 Chronicles 15.
[20] 12 Especially the three first.
It was to such a city, the highway between Rome and the East, that the Apostle bent his steps. It was about the close of the year 51. The time was unusually favourable for his arrival. Not only would he find the usual concourse of strangers from all parts of the world, but there was an unusual number of Jews there at that moment, in consequence of the decree of Claudius that ‘all Jews were to depart from Rome[21].’ We can therefore imagine what feelings were in the Apostle’s mind as he entered the Saronic Gulf after his almost fruitless visit to Athens. On a level piece of rock, 200 feet above the level of the sea, stood the city itself[22]. Above it the hill of Acro-Corinthus, crowned by the walls of the Corinthian citadel, rose to the height of 1886 feet[23]. The temples and public buildings of the city, overlaid with gold, silver, and brass, according to the custom of the ancient world, met his eye, and whether glittering in the brilliancy of an Eastern sun, or less splendid in shade, they had a tale to tell him of superstitions to be encountered, and men to be turned from the power of Satan unto God. The hope must have risen strong within him, and was soon to be converted into certainty[24], that God had much people in that city. And as he landed, and beheld the luxury and pride, riches in their selfishness, vice in its shameless effrontery, and poverty in its degradation and neglect, as well as the people of various nationalities who thronged the streets then, as they do still in all great maritime cities, he must have felt that, though he might stay there long—his visit lasted a year and a half—yet that there was no time to be lost. He first preached the good tidings to the chosen people, Jews and proselytes
[25], and was ‘pressed in spirit[26]’ as he thought of the unusual opportunity which was here afforded him. And when, according to their custom, the Jews reviled his doctrine and refused to listen to it, he shook out his garment and said, ‘Your blood be upon your own heads. I am clean, from henceforth I will go to the Gentiles[27].’ And he kept his word. He was encouraged by an influential secession from the Jewish community[28], headed by Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, but he never entered the synagogue again. In a house ‘hard by[29],’ he ministered to the Jews who had attached themselves to him, and to the Gentiles who came to listen to his words. Under the protection of Gallio, the proconsul[30], who entertained a true Roman contempt for the Jewish law and all questions arising out of it, he was allowed to minister in peace for ‘many days[31].’ And thus were laid the foundations of the Corinthian Church[32].
[21] Act_18:2. Cf. Suetonius, Claudius, 25. “Judaeos impulsore Christo (or according to some editions, Chresto) assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit,” where the heathen writer, in his contempt for the Jews and their sects, has not taken the trouble to ascertain the facts. Christianity for years afterwards (see Act_28:21-22) had failed to create any strong feeling among the Jews at Rome.
[22] Act_17:34. Corinth did not lie immediately on the sea, but a little inland (see map). Its ports were Lechaeum and Cenchrea (Rom_16:1), the former on the Western, the latter on the Eastern side of the Isthmus. The former was connected with the city by the long walls, as in the case of the Piraeus at Athens. Lechaeum was not more than a mile and a half from the city; Cenchrea was about nine miles distant.
[23] “Neither the Acropolis of Athens, nor the Larissa of Argos, nor any of the more celebrated mountain fortresses of Western Europe—not even Gibraltar—can compare with this gigantic citadel” Col. Mure. Statius [Thebaid vii. 106) speaks of it as protecting with its shadow the two seas alternately.
[24] Act_18:10.
[25] Or perhaps even heathens. Act_18:4.
[26] v. 5.
[27] v. 6.
[28] v. 8.
[29] v. 7.
[30] v. 14, 17.
[31] v. 18. The Authorized Version has ‘a good while.’
[32] For further information about Corinth, see Conybeare and Howson, Life and Epistles of St Paul, Stanley, Introduction to 1st Corinthians, Smith’s Dictionary of Geography, and Leake’s Morea. There are few remains of antiquity now to be seen at Corinth or the Isthmus. The seven Doric columns figured in Conybeare and Howson’s work are all that are left at Corinth, while at the Isthmus, though (see notes on ch. 1Co_9:14) the outlines of ancient remains may still be traced, it needs an intimate topographical acquaintance with the spot to find them out.
CHAPTER II
The Corinthian Church
- Its foundation. In the Acts of the Apostles we find that the system adopted by St Paul[33] in founding Christian Churches was as follows. Accompanied by one, and as the number of converts increased, by more than one trustworthy colleague or disciple, he traversed the particular district he desired to evangelise, making as long a stay in each city as circumstances permitted[34]. The length of his stay usually depended upon the importance of the city, and its fitness as a centre whence the influence of the Gospel might spread to distant parts. Thus Antioch, the capital of Syria, Corinth, the resort, as has been seen[35], of men of various nationalities, and Ephesus, the metropolis of Asia Minor, became successively the abode of St Paul for a lengthened period. The smaller churches he left under the care of elders, selected from his converts, no doubt on the principle laid down in the Epistle to Timothy[36], that they should be men who had previously enjoyed a reputation for gravity and sobriety of life. The condition laid down in the same Epistle, that they should not have been newly converted[37], was of course impossible in this early stage of the history of the community. The more important Churches enjoyed the Apostle’s superintendence for a longer period; but it was impossible, when leaving them, to avoid placing them under the care of men whose Christian profession was immature. Many evils thus naturally arose in communities to which the principles of Christianity were so new. The manner in which these evils were met by the Apostle is worthy of remark. He gradually gathered round him a band of men who were familiar with his teaching and principles of action. When any scandals or difficulties arose, and it was impossible to deal with them in person, he despatched some of his companions to the place where their presence was required[38]. He gave them instructions how to deal with the cases that had arisen[39], and further enjoined them to return to him as speedily as possible with a report of their success or failure[40]. St Paul followed the same course in Corinth as elsewhere. For a year and a half he stayed there, and endeavoured to gain for Christianity a hearing among those who resorted to Corinth from all quarters of the world. He enjoyed unusual opportunities; for the protection of Gallio, and the unpopularity of the Jews with the heterogeneous mob of Corinth[41], prevented the Jews from raising their usual disturbances. As we have already seen, a number of Jews adhered to his teaching, but the majority (ch. 1Co_12:2; cf. also ch. 1Co_8:7, note) of the members of the Church were Gentiles, and by far the greater number (ch. 1Co_1:26) persons of inferior rank and small intellectual attainments. Among these, as the proportion of Roman names shews (see 1Co_1:14; 1Co_1:16; 1Co_16:17; Rom_16:21-23; Act_18:8; Act_18:17), a majority were of Roman origin, while a smaller number were of Greek descent.
[33] We have no account of the method pursued by any other Apostle.
[34] He was frequently driven away by the turbulent conduct of the Jews, Act_13:8; Act_13:50; Act_14:2; Act_14:5; Act_17:5; Act_17:13; Act_18:12.
[35] Ch. 1.
[36] 1Ti_3:7.
[37] 1Ti_3:6.
[38] 1Co_4:17; 2Co_8:6; 2Co_8:16-17; 2Co_9:5.
[39] 1Ti_1:3; 2Ti_4:1-2; Tit_1:5.
[40] 2Co_7:6; 2Co_7:13.
[41] According to the received text, it was the Greeks who beat the ruler of the synagogue. It is quite possible that the word has been omitted from some of the best MSS. in Act_18:17, from an idea that the Sosthenes mentioned there was the companion of St Paul, and that, if he were so, he must have been already converted. See note on ch. 1Co_1:1. For the opposite view consult Paley, Horae Paulinae, 1st Ep. to the Corinthians, No. 8, note. - Condition of the Corinthian Church. St Paul left Corinth in consequence of a determination he had formed to spend the approaching feast at Jerusalem[42], a determination which possibly had some connection with the vow under the stress of which he left Corinth[43]. In consequence of the earnest entreaty of the Ephesians[44] that he would give them the benefit of his presence, he spent three years among them on his return from Jerusalem[45]. But the latter part of his stay was disquieted by reports of disorders at Corinth[46]. Certain teachers had arrived at Corinth, imbued with Jewish leanings[47], who had brought letters of recommendation with them from other Churches[48], and who set themselves to undermine the credit and apostolic authority of St Paul[49], and even, as some have gathered from 2Co_10:5-6, to persuade the Corinthian Christians to set him at nought altogether. He was a man of no eloquence, they said[50]. He was ignorant of the rules of rhetoric[51]. He had not even the physique of the orator[52]. And, besides this, he was no true Apostle. He had not been among the disciples of Jesus Himself[53]. And his conduct conclusively shewed that he and his companion Barnabas did not possess an authority co-ordinate with that of the twelve[54]. His doctrine, too, was irreconcilable with theirs. He was a renegade Jew. He had thrown off the yoke of the Jewish law, whereas it was well known that the original Apostles of the Lord regarded it as binding[55]. Such intelligence as this was alarming enough in itself. Teachers like these had already alienated from St Paul the members of one Church which he had founded[56]. But the effect at Corinth was infinitely more mischievous. The whole community had become disorganised. A tendency had arisen to estimate men by their personal gifts rather than by their spiritual powers or their Divine commission. Those who adhered to St Paul’s teaching were tempted to throw off their allegiance to his person, and to transfer it to Apollos, the gifted Alexandrian teacher, who had visited Corinth after St Paul’s departure[57]. Some declared that they followed St Peter, who was placed by our Lord Himself at the head of the Apostolic band[58]. Others protested that they followed no human teacher, but built their faith on the words of Christ Himself, interpreted, most probably, just as suited themselves1[59]. A general relaxation of discipline followed these dissensions. In their intellectual exaltation the Corinthians had passed over a grave social scandal in their body without notice[60]. The Holy Communion, by its institution the Feast of Love, had degenerated into a disorderly general meal, in which the prevalent personal and social antagonism was manifested in an unseemly manner[61], in which the poor were altogether neglected[62], and in which even drunkenness was allowed to pass unrebuked[63]. The women threw off their veils in the Christian congregation, and gave indications of a determination to carry their newfound liberty so far as to be destructive of womanly modesty and submissiveness[64]. Beside this, the spiritual gifts which God had bestowed upon His Church had been shamefully misused[65]. They had become occasions of envy and strife. Those who had received them considered themselves justified in looking down upon those common-place Christians who had them not. And as is invariably the case, pride on the one hand begat bitterness and jealousy on the other. The misuse, too, of the spiritual gifts had intruded itself into the congregation. Men who had received such manifest proofs of the Divine favour regarded themselves as released from all obligations to control the exercise of the powers with which they were endowed. They interrupted each other, they exercised their gifts at improper times, till the aspect of a Christian congregation was sometimes more suggestive of lunacy than of the sober self-restraint Christianity was intended to produce
[66]. So far had the evil of division proceeded that there were not wanting those who assailed the great cardinal principle of the resurrection of the dead, and were thus opening the door to the most grievous excesses[67]. Such a condition of a community might well disturb the mind of its founder. St Paul could not leave Ephesus at present, for a ‘great door and effectual’ had been opened to him there[68]. But the occasion was urgent and could not wait for his personal presence. He had already despatched one of his disciples with instructions to proceed to Corinth as soon as he had transacted some necessary business in Macedonia[69]. But, probably after Timothy’s departure, tidings arrived—if indeed it were not the pressure of his own overpowering anxiety—which induced the Apostle not to wait for Timothy’s arrival thither[70], but to send messengers at once. Titus, and with him a brother whose name is not given, were therefore sent direct to Corinth[71], most probably in charge of the Epistle with which we are now concerned[72]. Another reason weighed with St Paul in his determination to write. Some members of the Corinthian Church had sought information from him on certain points[73]. (a) The Platonic philosophy, which had recently invaded the Jewish Church, had placed an exaggerated value on celibacy, and there were many at Corinth who were still sincerely attached to St Paul, and desired to have his opinion[74]. (b) Another difficulty had also arisen. St Paul was everywhere impressing on his converts the doctrine of their freedom from the obligations of the Jewish law. He went so far as to declare that the Christian was bound by no external law whatever[75]. There was nothing, in fact, which in itself was unlawful to the Christian[76]. The lawfulness or unlawfulness of an act was to be determined by the circumstances of the case. And the tribunal by which these nice points were to be decided was the conscience of the individual. Such large principles as these were likely to be misapplied, and, in fact, they were misapplied. Some Christians considered themselves absolved from all obligations whatever. Strong in their contempt for idolatry and idols, they claimed a right to sit at an idol feast, in the very precincts of the temple itself[77]. That such conduct was highly offensive or dangerous to others was to them a matter of no moment. If those who were scrupulous about eating meats offered to idols shunned their company as that of men guilty of gross and open apostacy, they ridiculed their narrow-mindedness. If others were tempted by the license they claimed to relapse into idolatry, they considered it to be no concern of theirs[78]. And their abuse of Christian liberty and of the principles the Apostle had laid down, did but add to the confusion already existing in the Corinthian Church. (c) There were sundry minor questions on which St Paul’s opinion was asked. The chief of these was a difficulty which had arisen out of an expression of his, in an epistle now lost, in which he bade them “not to company with fornicators[79].” In the heathen world, and in Corinth especially, such a command, if literally carried out, would involve an almost entire cessation of intercourse with the heathen. It was necessary to decide these questions at once, and so to give free course to the Christian life of the Corinthian Church.
[42] Act_18:21. The feast was probably that of Pentecost.
[43] Act_18:18.
[44] Act_18:20.
[45] Act_20:31.
[46] 1Co_1:11.
[47] 2Co_11:22.
[48] 2Co_3:1.
[49] 1Co_9:1-5; 2Co_12:12; 2Co_13:3.
[50] 1Co_1:17; 1Co_2:4-5; 1Co_2:13; cf. 1Co_4:3; cf. 1Co_4:19.
[51] ἰδιώτης τῷ λόγῳ 2Co_11:6.
[52] 2Co_10:10.
[53] 1Co_10:1.
[54] 1Co_9:5-6.
[55] Gal_2:7-13.
[56] Gal_1:6-7; Gal_3:1; Gal_4:16.
[57] See note on ch. 1Co_1:12.
[58] ch. 1Co_1:12.
[59] 10 Some German writers have endeavoured to shew that the Corinthian Church was divided into four distinct and clearly defined parties, owning respectively as their head, St Paul, Apollos, St Peter and Christ. Some have gone so far as to describe precisely the views of these several parties. But even if such defined parties had existed—and this is rendered very doubtful by 1Co_4:6—we have not sufficient information at our disposal to decide what were the exact tenets of each school.
[60] ch. 1Co_5:1-2.
[61] ch. 1Co_11:18-19.
[62] 1Co_11:22.
[63] 1Co_11:21.
[64] 1Co_11:5.
[65] ch. xii., xiv.
[66] ch. 1Co_14:23.
[67] ch. 1Co_15:32-34
[68] ch. 1Co_16:9.
[69] Act_19:22; 1Co_4:17; 1Co_16:10.
[70] See note on ch. 1Co_16:10.
[71] 2Co_2:13; 2Co_8:6; 2Co_8:16-18; 2Co_8:22-23; 2Co_12:18.
[72] See 2Co_7:6-15, where the arrival of the first Epistle is connected with that of Titus. The obedience and fear and trembling with which he was received is not only closely connected with the effect produced by the Epistle, but is scarcely intelligible without it.
[73] ch. 1Co_7:1.
[74] ch. 7.
[75] Rom_6:14; Rom_7:14; Rom_4:6; Rom_8:2.
[76] ch. 1Co_6:12, 1Co_10:23.
[77] ch. 1Co_8:10.
[78] Ibid.
[79] ch. 1Co_5:9.
CHAPTER III
Date, Place Of Writing, Character And Genuineness Of The Epistle - Date and Place of Writing. It was to the state of affairs described in the preceding chapter that the Apostle addressed himself in the Epistle under our consideration. In the spring of the year 57, before his departure from Ephesus for Macedonia, he wrote to his Corinthian converts. The subscription to this Epistle in the A. V. states it to have been written at Philippi. This mistake is due to a mistranslation of ch. 1Co_16:5. See note there. Calvin remarks further that the salutation in ch. 1Co_16:19 is not from the Churches of Macedonia, but of Asia Minor. Aquila and Priscilla, too (Act_18:2; Act_18:18; Act_18:26; cf. 1Co_16:19), appear to have taken up their abode at Ephesus. If, in conclusion, we compare the narrative in Acts 20. with 1Co_16:5; 1Co_16:8, we can have little doubt that the Epistle was written at Ephesus.
- Character of the Epistle. No Epistles give us so clear an insight into the character of St Paul as the two Epistles to the Corinthians[80]. Beside the deep and fervent love for God and man, and for the object of his preaching, Jesus Christ, both God and Man, visible in all his Epistles, we have in these Epistles the most remarkable individual characteristics. A large portion of the first Epistle is occupied with personal matters. In the first four chapters the Apostle deals with the divisions in the Corinthian Church, and these divisions, as we have seen, were caused by the intrigues of those who sought to disparage his qualifications and Apostolic authority. The character, therefore, of his preaching, the source of its inspiration, the nature of his work, the sacrifices he made for the Gospel’s sake as a proof of his sincerity, are subjects which take up a large part of the earlier portion of the Epistle. Again, in the ninth chapter, when he is about to refer once more to his own practice, he suddenly remembers that that very practice has been turned into a pretext for denying his Apostolic commission, and he enters into an animated defence of it. Some of the most marked characteristics of St Paul’s style, as revealing to us the nature of the man, are to be found in the Second Epistle. Such are the impassioned vehemence of his self-vindication, his deep anxiety and affection for his converts, the sternness which contends with his love, his sudden deflections from the main argument as some subsidiary idea or illustration occurs to him, the irony mingled with his rebukes, peculiarities which reach their climax in that Epistle. But specimens of these peculiarities are to be found in this Epistle also. There is a striking instance of some of them in ch. 1Co_4:8-13, and in ch. 1Co_9:1. But for eloquence of the highest order, such as is displayed in the magnificent panegyric on love in ch. 13, no Epistle can compare with this. And there is no passage in any other Epistle which for depth of spiritual insight, felicity of illustration and force of argument combined, approaches the passage in which the doctrine of the Resurrection is at once defended and developed. One particular faculty, the shrewd common-sense of St Paul, which has received far less attention than it deserves, is more plainly manifested in this Epistle than any other. A very large portion of the Epistle is taken up with practical matters. It is “Christianity applied to the details of ordinary life[81].” And no one can have read the part of the Epistle which extends from ch. 5 to ch. 14 inclusive, without being struck with the keenness of the Apostle’s discrimination, which sends him at once to the root of the matter, and enables him to decide on the broadest and most intelligible ground what is permissible to the Christian, and what not. Witness his decisive condemnation of the incestuous person, ch. 1Co_5:1-5, and of fornication, ch. 1Co_6:12-20, as well as the basis on which they rest. Observe the way in which he deals with the question of marriage in ch. 7, and, above all, with the delicate and difficult case when the one party has been converted to Christianity, and the other has not (vv. 12–17). Observe the broad distinction he draws between the lawfulness of a thing in itself, and its permissibility in all cases, in the discussion of the question of meats offered in sacrifice to idols (chapter 8 and 10), as well as the calm decision with which he rules (in ch. 14) that supernatural gifts need as much unselfishness and discretion in their use as those which come to men in the ordinary course. It is characteristics like these which mark the Apostle off as a man sui generis, and while they often add tenfold to the difficulty of understanding him, have given to his writings a conspicuous place, even in the New Testament itself.
[80] See Conybeare and Howson, Vol. 11. p. 28.
[81] Robertson, Lectures on the Corinthians. - Genuineness. It is to their remarkable originality, as well as the fact that they obviously arose out of the state of the Corinthian Church immediately after its foundation, that these Epistles owe the fact that, with one or two others, their genuineness has never been seriously disputed. It would be impossible for a forger, especially in an age when the writing of fiction had not been reduced to a system, to have invented an Epistle so abounding in local and personal allusions, and to affairs of immediate moment, without hopelessly entangling himself in contradictions. And these two Epistles also possess a testimony to their authenticity which no other book, even of the New Testament, enjoys. Whereas most ancient writings are identified by some allusion or quotation in a writer three or four centuries later than their author, a chain of testimony from the very first establishes the fact that this Epistle, in the form in which it has come down to us, proceeds from the hand of St Paul. Our first witness is Clement of Rome, the friend and companion of St Paul (
Php_4:3), and afterwards[82] Bishop of Rome. About the year 97 (though some would place it as early as 68), forty years after this Epistle was written, and during the troubles which befel the Christians in the reign of Domitian, Clement wrote to the Corinthians in reference to some disputes which had arisen there of the same kind as those of which St Paul had complained. This Epistle of Clement possessed high authority, and was often bound up with the New Testament and read in church[83]. In it he thus writes, “Take into your hands the Epistle of the blessed Paul, the Apostle. What did he first write to you in the beginning of the Gospel? Of a truth he enjoined you spiritually concerning himself and Cephas and Apollos, because even then you had begun to shew partialities[84].” Polycarp, again, the disciple of St John, quotes 1Co_6:2 as the words of St Paul[85]. In the shorter Greek edition of the Epistles of Ignatius, who was Bishop of Antioch, and had been known to the Apostles[86], there are many quotations from this Epistle, though its author is not named[87]. Irenaeus, the disciple of Polycarp[88], and of others who had seen the Apostles[89], not only quotes this Epistle as the work of St Paul, but mentions it as having been written to the Corinthians[90]. After his time it is needless to multiply quotations. At the close of the second or the beginning of the third century, Tertullian, a learned and able writer, not only quotes it but devotes a considerable part of his Treatise against Marcion to an analysis of its contents, and from that time onward it has unhesitatingly been accepted as the work of the Apostle St Paul, and as one of the canonical writings of the Church.
[82] Euseb. Eccl. Hist. iii. 4.
[83] Ibid. iii. 16. It is found in the famous Alexandrian MS. of the N.T., one of the oldest which have come down to us.
[84] Clement, 1st Ep. to the Corinthians, ch. 47.
[85] Epistle to the Philippians, ch. 11.
[86] Eus. Eccl. Hist. iii. 22.
[87] The genuineness of this edition is, however, denied by some.
[88] Against Heresies, iii. 3. 4.
[89] Ibid. iv. 32:1.
[90] Book iii. Against Heresies, 11. 9; 18. 2. In v. 7. 1 he calls it the First Epistle to the Corinthians.
CHAPTER IV
Doctrine Of The Resurrection
There is no other passage in the New Testament which treats of the Christian doctrine of the Resurrection with such force and fulness as the fifteenth chapter of this Epistle. This doctrine is the keystone of the Gospel arch, and formed, as we learn from the first record of the proceedings of the Christian Church, the chief feature in the preaching of its first Apostles. They ‘gave witness’ of the Resurrection of the Lord ‘with great power[91]’; they grieved the Sadducees by ‘teaching through Jesus the Resurrection of the dead[92]’; they regarded themselves as specially concerned to be ‘witnesses of the Resurrection[93].’ It was evidently the leading feature in the teaching of St Paul. In his sermon at Athens he preached ‘Jesus and the Resurrection[94].’ And when, years afterwards, he stood to answer for his heresies at a tribunal of his fellow-countrymen, his first remark was ‘of the hope and Resurrection of the dead am I called in question[95].’ We are therefore prepared to find him laying especial stress upon this doctrine. We shall not be surprised to find him preferring it to all others. It is to him the articulus stantis aut cadentis ecclesiae. Without it there is no Christianity[96], no deliverance from sin[97], no future life[98]. To deny it is to give the lie to all his preaching[99]. And therefore he takes especial care to bear witness to the fact.
[91] Act_4:33.
[92] Act_4:2.
[93] Act_1:22.
[94] Act_17:18.
[95] Act_23:6.
[96] Ch. 1Co_15:14.
[97] v. 17.
[98] v. 18.
[99] v. 15.
I. His words on this point are well worthy of study, for upon the fact of the Resurrection depends not only the whole doctrinal system of Christianity, but the whole question of the credibility of the Gospel History. An acute writer has lately observed that the whole question of miracles stands or falls with the capital miracle of the Resurrection of Christ[100]. If that miracle be once conceded, it is but splitting straws to discuss the possibility or probability of minor miracles. If it be denied, with it goes the whole claim of Christ to be considered in any special or peculiar sense the Son of God. We are therefore forced to give marked attention to what was very probably the first written account we have of the Resurrection of Christ[101]. And here we may remark (1) the fearless tone of the Apostle[102]. There is, as Robertson has observed, the “ring of truth” about the whole chapter[103]. There is no hesitation, no half-heartedness. The language is not that of a man who says “I hope” or “I believe,” but ‘I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that He shall stand at the latter day upon the earth[104].’ We may observe further (2) the time when the Apostle was writing. It was about twenty-five years after the Resurrection1[105]. There were plenty of witnesses still alive who could be interrogated about what they themselves had seen and heard. Nor was there any difficulty in the investigation. Jerusalem was by no means difficult of access from Corinth, and abundant opportunity existed for disproving the assertions of the Apostle if such disproof were possible. Lastly observe (3) the nature of the testimony. Instead of being vague and confused, it is definite and precise. Names of living men are given[106], men who had themselves publicly stated that they had eaten and drunk with Jesus after He had risen from the dead[107]. Occasions are mentioned, and the greater part of five hundred persons are stated to be still living, who saw the fact with their own eyes[108]. No clearer evidence could be given that, as the Apostle said on another occasion, this thing ‘was not done in a corner[109].’
[100] Ecce Homo, p. 10 (4th edition).
[101] Unless we suppose the Gospels of St Matthew and St Luke to have been already written. See notes on ch. 1Co_11:23, 1Co_15:3.
[102] Ch. 1Co_15:1-20; 1Co_15:30-34.
[103] Lect. xxviii. on the Epistles to the Corinthians.
[104] Job_19:25.
[105] 10 See note on ch. 1Co_15:15.
[106] Ch. 1Co_15:5; 1Co_15:7.
[107] Act_10:41.
[108] ch. 1Co_15:6.
[109] Act_26:26.
II. We may remark next on the mode of the Resurrection. Christ, we are told, is the last Adam[110], a second progenitor, that is, of mankind. A new and grander humanity is introduced into the world by Him. Its law of operation is spiritual, not natural[111]; that is to say, it comes into the world not in the ordinary course of nature, but by means which are above and beyond that course[112]. The means whereby the first rudiments of the manhood which is from above is communicated to man is fait[113], that is, the practical acknowledgment of the facts of the unseen spiritual universe[114]. This saves man by the gradual incorporation into his very nature of that spiritual humanity which is given to the world by Christ1[115]. And if this process be in operation at death, if the humanity of Christ be then dwelling in man, if he have ‘the earnest of the Spirit1[116],’ through Whom that humanity is imparted1[117], his resurrection is secured1[118]. His body is then as a seed planted in the ground. It contains within it the principle of an imperishable life, a principle which at the end of a period of any length soever, will assert its power. But not at once1[119]. For (1) “the literal resurrection is but a development of the spiritual.” It is from “spiritual goodness” that we can “infer future glory[120].” The spiritual life must manifest its presence here in antagonism to all that is evil and base, in sympathy and in active cooperation with all that is great and glorious and like Christ, if it is to assert its power hereafter in victory over the grave. And (2), this great conflict, necessary in the world as well as in every individual soul, must have been fought out, not merely in the individual but in the race, before that victory is obtained. The natural life in the world at large, as in the individual, must precede, and eventually be ‘swallowed up’ by the spiritual[121]. All that ‘opposeth and exalteth itself’ against the kingdom of righteousness must be brought into captivity before the spiritual principle can have its perfect working[122]. Even death itself must cease to be[123]. And then the power from on high will transform our body of corruption into a spiritual machine of vast and exalted powers[124]. As the germ of life of the future plant is contained in the seed planted in the ground, so there will be a link of connection between the new body and the old[125]. As the same germ, by the law of its being, attracts to itself material particles suitable to its needs as it unfolds to its full perfection, so will it be with the spirit of man after the Resurrection[126]. But the transformation will involve no loss, except of what is known and felt to be a hindrance and a burden[127]. The new body will be a development of, not a substitute for, the old. ‘This corruptible’ will ‘put on incorruption’ and ‘this mortal’ will ‘put on immortality[128].’ We shall not ‘be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality may be swallowed up of life1[129].’ And this wondrous change will be due to the fact that Christ, in His new and glorified humanity, dwells in the hearts of those who are united to Him by faith. He will ‘quicken our mortal bodies, on account of His Spirit that dwells in them.’ ‘If Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the spirit is life, because of righteousness[130],’ that is, His Righteousness, appropriated and inwrought in us by faith. ‘If we have been planted together in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in the likeness of His Resurrection[131]’: ‘for as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive[132].’ And that because ‘whoso eateth My Flesh and drinketh My Blood,’ whoso assimilates and makes his own by taking it into himself the new and Divine Manhood of the Son of God, ‘
hath eternal life, and I will raise him up at the Last Day’.[133]
[110] Ch. 1Co_15:45.
[111] St Joh_1:13; Joh_3:5; 1Co_2:4-5; 1Co_15:50; Tit_3:5-6; Jas_1:18; 1Pe_1:23.
[112] St Joh_3:3; 1Co_15:47; 2Co_5:17; Gal_6:15; Heb_7:16.
[113] St Joh_3:16-18; Joh_6:40; Joh_6:47; Rom_3:25; 1Co_15:1-2, &c.
[114] Heb_11:1.
[115] 10 St Mat_13:33; St Joh_6:53-60; Joh_14:23; Joh_17:23; Rom_6:5-6; Gal_2:20, &c.
[116] 1 2Co_1:22; Eph_1:13-14.
[117] 12 St Joh_3:5-6; Joh_3:8; Rom_5:5; Rom_7:1-17; 1Co_6:19; Gal_4:6-7; Eph_2:22; Php_1:19; Tit_3:5 (Greek); 1Jn_4:13.
[118] 13 St Joh_6:54; Rom_8:11; 1Co_15:37-38; 1Co_15:42-44; 1Co_15:52-54.
[119] 14 1Co_15:28.
[120] Robertson, Lecture xliii. on Epistles to the Corinthians.
[121] 1Co_15:46; 1Co_15:53-54; 2Co_5:4.
[122] 1Co_15:25.
[123] 1Co_15:26.
[124] 1Co_15:42-44; 1Co_15:53; 2Co_5:1-4; Php_3:21; Col_3:4. 1Jn_3:2; Rev_1:13-16.
[125] 1Co_15:36-38; 1Co_15:42-44.
[126] 1Co_15:38. See note.
[127] Rom_8:23; 2Co_5:2; 2Co_5:4.
[128] 1Co_15:53.
[129] 10 2Co_5:4.
[130] Rom_8:10.
[131] Rom_6:5.
[132] 1Co_15:22.
[133] St Joh_6:54.
CHAPTER V
Analysis Of The Epistle
Part I. The Divisions in the Corinthian Church. Ch. 1–4
Section 1. Salutation and Introduction, 1Co_1:1-9.
(α) The persons addressed 1, 2.
(β) Salutation of grace and peace 3.
(γ) Thanksgiving for the mercies vouchsafed to the Corinthian Church 4–9.
Section 2. Rebuke of the Divisions in the Corinthian Church, 1Co_1:10-17.
(α) Exhortation to unity 10.
(β) Reason for this exhortation. Report concerning the divisions at Corinth 11, 12.
(γ) Christ, not Paul, the centre of the Christian system 13–17.
Section 3. God’s message not intended to flatter the pride of man, 1Co_1:17-24.
(α) The preaching of the Cross intended to destroy men’s confidence in their own wisdom 17–21.
(β) Therefore it would of course disappoint men’s natural ideas of power or wisdom among Jews or Gentiles 22, 23.
(γ) Yet to those who can appreciate it, the doctrine of the Cross can prove to be both power and wisdom 24.
(δ) And this because God is so infinitely above man that the least evidence of His greatness is far above man’s highest efforts 25.
(ε) The character of the first converts to Christianity regarded as a witness to this truth 25–29.
(ζ) Christ the true source of all excellence 30, 31.
Section 4. The wisdom of the Gospel discernible by the spiritual faculties alone, 1Co_2:1-16.
(α) St Paul eschewed all human wisdom, that God might have all the glory 1–5.
(β) Not that he had no wisdom to impart, but it was wisdom of a different character from that of Man_1:6-8.
(γ) For it came by the revelation of God’s Spirit 9, 10.
(δ) Who had perfect means of knowing what He revealed 11.
(ε) This is the Spirit the Christian teachers have received and by Whose influence they speak 12, 13.
(ζ) The man who does not raise himself above this life has no faculty wherewith to apprehend these things 14.
(η) It belongs alone to the man who possesses spiritual faculties, has the Mind of Christ 15, 16.
Section 5. The partizanship of the Corinthians a hindrance to spiritual progress, 1Co_3:1-4.
(α) The Corinthians were incapable of entering into this spiritual Wisdom 1, 2.
(β) Because they looked at the man, not at his message 3, 4.
Section 6. Christian Ministers only labourers of more or less efficiency, the substantial work being God’s, 1Co_3:5-23.
(α) Men are but instruments, God the efficient cause 5–8.
(β) Man’s duty is to build properly on the true foundation, Jesus Christ 10–15.
(γ) Responsibility incurred by those who undertake to teach in the Church 16, 17.
(δ) Need for them to renounce the wisdom of this world 18–20.
(ε) Conclusion, ‘Let no man glory in men,’ for all things are God’s 22, 23.
Section 7. The true estimation of Christ’s ministers, and the true criterion of their work, 1Co_4:1-7.
(α) Christian teachers, as ‘ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God,’ outside the sphere of human judgments 1–5.
(β) St Paul desires to put down personal rivalries in the Church 6, 7.
Section 8. Contrast between the Corinthian teachers and St Paul, 1Co_4:8-21.
(α) The Corinthians enjoy all the temporal benefits of the Gospel, St Paul bears all the burden 8–13.
(β) St Paul’s object to lead the Corinthians into conformity to the Gospel 14–17.
(γ) He will use severity for this end, if other means fail 18–21.
Part II. Moral Disorders in the Corinthian Church. Ch. 5–7
Section 1. The case of the Incestuous Person, 1Co_5:1-8.
(α) The offender to be expelled 1–5.
(β) Reason: because the leaven of evil sunders men from Christ 6–8.
Section 2. Application of the same principle to offenders generally, 1Co_5:9-13.
(α) The duty of refusing to hold intercourse with offenders to be confined to those within the Church 9–11.
(β) Because those only who are within the Church are within the sphere of its judgment 12, 13
Section 3. The way to settle disputes in the Christian Church, 1Co_6:1-11.
(α) The sin of going to law in the heathen courts rebuked 1–7.
(β) The graver crimes which led to such lawsuits rebuked 8–11.
Section 4. The guilt of the Fornicator, 1Co_6:12-20.
(α) General principle. The lawfulness of all actions in themselves. Limitation (1) that they must not injure others, (2) that they must not interfere with our mastery over ourselves 12.
(β) Practical application 13–20.
(1) Comparative unimportance of questions concerning food 13.
(2) Immense importance of the question of fornication 13–20.
(a) Because fornication is a violation of the fundamental laws of the human body 13.
(b) Because the body was created for and redeemed by Christ 13, 14.
(c) Consequently fornication violates the union between God and the body He has created for Himself 15–17.
(d) Therefore the sin of fornication has a special guilt of its own 18.
(e) Aggravated by the fact that Christ has made the body the temple of His Spirit 19, 20.
Section 5. Advice concerning Marriage and Celibacy, 1Co_7:1-9.
(α) General principle. Celibacy the state preferable in itself, marriage the more necessary under existing circumstances 1, 2–9.
(β) Duties of married persons 3–5.
Section 6. Mutual obligations of Married Persons, 1Co_7:10-16.
(α) General instruction. Married persons not to live apart or to contract second marriages during the lifetime of their former partners 10–14.
(β) Modification under special circumstances, where one party is converted to Christianity while the other remains in heathenism 15, 16.
Section 7. Christianity not intended to revolutionize the relations between the believer and society, 1Co_7:17-24.
Extension of the above principle generally 17, 24.
Special application
(α) to Jews and Gentiles 18, 19.
(β) to slaves 20–23.
Section 8. General instructions concerning the marriage of Virgins, 1Co_7:25-28.
(α) Celibacy preferable, marriage allowable 25–28.
(β) Marriage to be contracted in a spirit of self-denial 29–31.
(γ) For marriage tends to produce care, and care is alien to the spirit of the Gospel 32–35.
(δ) The duty of a father towards his daughter 36–38.
Section 9. Second marriage of women, 1Co_7:39-40. Permitted but not advised.
Part III. Social and Ecclesiastical Disorders in the Corinthian Church. Ch. 8–14
Division 1. The question of meats offered in sacrifice to idols. 8–11:1.
Section 1. The question discussed, 8.
(α) To be settled rather by love than knowledge 1–3.
(β) The enlightened Christian knows that an idol is really nothing 4–6.
(γ) But all are not equally enlightened 7.
(δ) The question being in itself indifferent, we are bound to consider what are likely to be the results of our conduct 8–13.
Section 2. (parenthetical). St Paul’s defence of his Apostolic authority, 1Co_9:1-14.
This authority, and his right to receive maintenance at the hands of the Church, having been questioned (v. 1, 4–6), St Paul shews:
(α) That the Corinthian Church is itself a standing guarantee of his Apostleship 2.
(β) Three illustrations of his right to maintenance by the Church (see notes) 7.
(γ) The principle further illustrated from the Law 8–10.
(δ) Spiritual benefits deserve at least temporal recompense 11.
(ε) The principle has been conceded in the case of others 12.
(ζ) Further illustrations from the temple service 13, 14.
Section 3. (Return to main argument, see end of ch. 8). St Paul’s own use of his Christian liberty is restrained by the thought of the needs of others, 1Co_9:15-23.
(α) This was his object in preaching the Gospel without charge 15–18.
(β) His practice being to ignore self for the profit of others 19–23.
Section 4. Exhortation to self-restraint, 1Co_9:24-27.
(α) All need self-restraint in the Christian course 24, 25.
(β) St Paul himself finds it no easy task 26, 27.
Section 5. Example of Israel a warning to Christians, 1Co_10:1-14.
(α) In spite of great privileges, want of self-restraint was fatal to the majority of the Israelites in their pilgrimage 1–10.
(β) Christians must take heed by their example 11–14.
Section 6. The danger of eating meats offered to idols shewn from the example of sacrificial feasts in general, 1Co_10:15-22.
(α) Eating at the Lord’s Table brings a man into communion with Christ 15–17.
(β) The same principle applied to Jewish sacrificial meals 18.
(γ) The idol is itself nothing, but its worship involves the recognition as divine of other beings than God 19, 20.
(δ) We must either decide for God or His enemies, we cannot have fellowship with both 21, 22.
Section 7. Practical directions on the subject, 1Co_10:23 to 1Co_11:1.
The principle (ch. 1Co_6:12) being restated in v. 23, it follows:
(α) That we are to aim at the profit of others, not our own 24.
(β) That we need have no scruples of our own on the point 25–27.
(γ) But that we are to respect the scruples of others 28.
(δ) Not that they have a right to lay down principles of action for us 29, 30.
(ε) But that we are bound in all things to seek God’s glory and the edification of our neighbour 31–11:1.
Division 2. The conduct and dress of women at the Public Services of the Church, 1Co_11:2-16.
(α) God’s order in the world 3.
(β) Men should be uncovered, women covered in the congregation 4–6.
(γ) Reason. The covering in the congregation the sign of being under authority while there 7–12.
(δ) Argument from sense of natural fitness 13–15.
(ε) Argument from the custom of the Churches 16.
Division 3. Disorders at the Lord’s Supper, 1Co_11:17-34.
(α) Divisions, self-assertion, and disorder in the congregation 17–22.
(β) Institution of the Lord’s Supper 23–26.
(γ) Manner in which it should be observed 27–34.
Division 4. Abuse of Spiritual Gifts, 12–14.
Section 1. Their origin and character, 1Co_12:1-11.
(α) How to discern their nature 1–3.
(β) The Spirit the same, his operations manifold, their object the profit of the Church 4–11.
Section 2. Comparison of the unity of the body, and the unity of the Church, 1Co_12:12-31.
(α) Analogy between the body and the Church, each being made up of many members, yet being one organized whole 12–14.
(β) Absurdity of setting up separate interests in the body 15–21.
(γ) Each member of the body possesses its own proper gifts, and receives its due share of honour 22–26.
(δ) Application of these principles to the Christian Church 27–31.
Section 3. The excellencies of Love, 1Co_12:31 to 1Co_13:13.
(α) Importance of love 1Co_12:31 to 1Co_13:3
(β) Character of love 4–7.
(γ) Permanence of love 8–13.
Section 4. Superiority of the gift of prophecy to that of tongues, 1Co_14:1-25.
(α) Prophecy superior to the gift of tongues, in that it is a means of edification 1–5.
(β) Reason. Unknown tongues not understood in the congregation 6–19.
(γ) The result of their public use, confusion instead of edification 20–23.
(δ) The opposite result produced by prophecy 24, 25.
Section 5. Regulations to insure decency and order, 1Co_14:26-40.
(α) Rebuke of self-assertion 26.
(β) Rules for the use of tongues 27, 28.
(γ) For prophecy 29–31.
(δ) Laid down because spiritual gifts should be under the rule of right reason 32, 33.
(ε) The public ministrations of women forbidden 34–36.
(ζ) Exhortation to obedience and order 37–40.
Part IV. Doctrine of the Resurrection. Ch. 15
Section 1. Establishment of the fact, 1Co_15:1-11.
(α) It formed part of St Paul’s preaching 1–4.
(β) It was testified to by sundry well-known eyewitnesses 5–7.
(γ) St Paul himself, whatever his Apostolic claims, had seen the Risen Lord 8.
Section 2. The Resurrection of Christ the foundation of all Christianity, 1Co_15:12-19.
(α) The resurrection of other men depends entirely upon it 12–14.
(β) To deny it is to destroy the credit of the Christian ministry 15.
(γ) As well as Christian faith, and hope, and deliverance from sin 16–19.
Section 3. The place of the Resurrection of Christ in the scheme of Redemption, 1Co_15:20-28.
(α) The Resurrection of Christ the first-fruits of His Work 20.
(β) For as man was the instrument of our death, so man was destined to be the instrument of our life 21, 22.
(γ) In the Divine order, Christ must precede His members 23.
(δ) And reduce, as Mediator, all that opposes God into submission to Himself 25–27.
(ε) In order that He may finally deliver up the Kingdom to the Father, and God may be all in all 24, 27, 28.
Section 4. Argument from the lives of believers, 1Co_15:29-34.
(α) Those who are baptized for the dead 29.
(β) Those who undergo suffering for Christ’s sake 30–32.
(γ) Danger of a contrary doctrine leading to a relaxation of morals 33, 34.
Section 5. Manner of the Resurrection, 1Co_15:35-53.
(α) Analogy of the seed: (1) it rises again; (2) there are different kinds of seeds 35–38.
(β) There are various genera in animal life 39.
(γ) There are diversities among the heavenly bodies 40, 41.
(δ) Therefore there will be (1) diversity, (2) change in the Resurrection bodies 42–44.
(ε) The change will be from the natural to the spiritual, through Christ the life-giving spirit 44, 45.
(ζ) Priority of the natural to the spiritual 46–49.
(η) The change consists in the translation of corruption into incorruption 50–53.
Section 6. Result of the Resurrection,—Victory 1Co_15:54-58.
(α) The believer’s victory over death 54–57.
(β) Christian exertion in this life not thrown away 58.
Part V. Sundry Practical Directions. Conclusion. Ch. 16
(α) Directions concerning the Collection 1–4.
(β) Information concerning St Paul’s impending visit 5–9.
(γ) Concerning Timothy and Apollos 10–12.
(δ) Exhortation to earnestness and love 13, 14.
(ε) Concerning Stephanas and his companions 15–18.
(ζ) Salutations 19–21.
(η) Solemn warning 22.
(θ) Benediction 23, 24.