1 Corinthians 1:10-17

Verse 10

Now I beseech you, brethren - The apostle having finished his introduction comes to his second point, exhorting them to abstain from dissensions, that they might be of the same heart and mind, striving together for the hope of the Gospel.

By the name of our Lord Jesus - By his authority, and in his place; and on account of your infinite obligations to his mercy in calling you into such a state of salvation.

That ye all speak the same thing - If they did not agree exactly in opinion on every subject, they might, notwithstanding, agree in the words which they used to express their religious faith. The members of the Church of God should labor to be of the same mind, and to speak the same thing, in order to prevent divisions, which always hinder the work of God. On every essential doctrine of the Gospel all genuine Christians agree: why then need religious communion be interrupted? This general agreement is all that the apostle can have in view; for it cannot be expected that any number of men should in every respect perfectly coincide in their views of all the minor points, on which an exact conformity in sentiment is impossible to minds so variously constituted as those of the human race. Angels may thus agree, who see nothing through an imperfect or false medium; but to man this is impossible. Therefore men should bear with each other, and not be so ready to imagine that none have the truth of God but they and their party.
Verse 11

By them which are of the house of Chloe - This was doubtless some very religious matron at Corinth, whose family were converted to the Lord; some of whom were probably sent to the apostle to inform him of the dissensions which then prevailed in the Church at that place. Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, mentioned 1Cor 16:17, were probably the sons of this Chloe.

Contentions - Εριδες, Altercations; produced by the σχισματα, divisions, mentioned above. When once they had divided, they must necessarily have contended, in order to support their respective parties.
Verse 12

Every one of you saith - It seems from this expression that the whole Church at Corinth was in a state of dissension: they were all divided into the following sects

1. Paulians, or followers of St. Paul;

2. Apollonians, or followers of Apollos;

3. Kephians, or followers of Kephas;

4. Christians, or followers of Christ.

See the Introduction, Section 5.

The converts at Corinth were partly Jews and partly Greeks. The Gentile part, as Dr. Lightfoot conjectures, might boast the names of Paul and Apollos; the Jewish, those of Kephas and Christ. But these again might be subdivided; some probably considered themselves disciples of Paul, he being the immediate instrument of their conversion, while others might prefer Apollos for his extraordinary eloquence.

If by Kephas the apostle Peter be meant, some of the circumcision who believed might prefer him to all the rest; and they might consider him more immediately sent to them; and therefore have him in higher esteem than they had Paul, who was the minister or apostle of the uncircumcision: and on this very account the converted Gentiles would prize him more highly than they did Peter.

Instead of Christ, Χριστου, some have conjectured that we should read Κρισπου, of Crispus; who is mentioned 1Cor 1:14. And some think that Χριστου, of Christ, is an interpolation, as it is not likely that Christ in any sense of the word could be said to be the head of a sect, or party, in his own Church; as all those parties held that Gospel, of which himself was both the author and the subject. But it is very easy to conceive that, in a Church so divided, a party might be found, who, dividing Christ from his ministers, might be led to say, "We will have nothing to do with your parties, nor with your party spirit; we are the disciples of Christ, and will have nothing to do with Paulians, Apollonians, or Kephians, as contradistinguished from Christ." The reading Κρισπου for Χριστου is not acknowledged by any MS. or version.
Verse 13

Is Christ divided? - Can he be split into different sects and parties? Has he different and opposing systems? Or, is the Messiah to appear under different persons?

Was Paul crucified for you? - As the Gospel proclaims salvation through the crucified only, has Paul poured out his blood as an atonement for you? This is impossible, and therefore your being called by my name is absurd; for his disciples you should be, alone, who has bought you by his blood.

Were ye baptized in the name of Paul? - To be baptized in, or into the name of one, implied that the baptized was to be the disciple of him into whose name, religion, etc., he was baptized. As if he said: Did I ever attempt to set up a new religion, one founded on my own authority, and coming from myself? On the contrary, have I not preached Christ crucified for the sin of the world; and called upon all mankind, both Jews and Gentiles, to believe on Him?
Verse 14

I thank God that I baptized none of you - None of those who now live in Corinth, except Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, Act 18:8. And Gaius, the same person probably with whom Paul lodged, Rom 16:23 (note). Dr. Lightfoot observes: "If this be Gaius, or Caius, to whom the third epistle of John was written, which is very probable when the first verse of that epistle (3Jn 1:1) is compared with Rom 16:23, then it will appear probable that John wrote his first epistle to the Corinthians. I wrote, says he, unto the Church - What Church? Certainly it must have been some particular Church which the apostle has in view, and the Church where Gaius himself resided. And if this be true, we may look for Diotrephes (3Jn 1:9) in the Corinthian Church; and the author of the schism of which the apostle complains. See the Introduction, Section 8.
Verse 15

Lest any should say, etc. - He was careful not to baptize, lest it should be supposed that he wished to make a party for himself; because superficial observers might imagine that he baptized them into his own name - to be his followers, though he baptized them into the name of Christ only.

Instead of εβαπτισα, I have baptized, the Codex Alexandrinus, the Codex Ephraim, and several others, with the Coptic, Sahidic, later Syriac in the margin, Armenian, Vulgate, some copies of the Itala, and several of the fathers, read εβαπτισθητε, ye were baptized. And if we read ἱνα, so that, instead of lest, the sentence will stand thus: So that no one can say that ye were baptized into my name. This appears to be the true reading, and for it Bp. Pearce offers several strong arguments.
Verse 16

The household of Stephanas - From 1Cor 16:15, we learn that the family of Stephanas were the first converts in Achaia, probably converted and baptized by the apostle himself. Epenetus is supposed to be one of this family. See the note on Rom 16:5.

I know not whether I baptized any other - I do not recollect that there is any person now residing in Corinth, or Achaia, besides the above mentioned, whom I have baptized. It is strange that the doubt here expressed by the apostle should be construed so as to affect his inspiration! What, does the inspiration of prophet or apostle necessarily imply that he must understand the geography of the universe, and have an intuitive knowledge of all the inhabitants of the earth, and how often, and where they may have changed their residence! Nor was that inspiration ever given so to work on a man's memory that he could not forget any of the acts which he had performed during life. Inspiration was given to the holy men of old that they might be able to write and proclaim the mind of God in the times which concern the salvation of men.
Verse 17

For Christ sent me not to baptize - Bp. Pearce translates thus: For Christ sent me, not so much to baptize as to preach the Gospel: and he supports his version thus - "The writers of the Old and New Testaments do, almost every where (agreeably to the Hebrew idiom) express a preference given to one thing beyond another by an affirmation of that which is preferred, and a negation of that which is contrary to it: and so it must be understood here, for if St. Paul was not sent at all to baptize, he baptized without a commission; but if he was sent, not only to baptize but to preach also, or to preach rather than baptize, he did in fact discharge his duty aright." It appears sufficiently evident that baptizing was considered to be an inferior office, and though every minister of Christ might administer it, yet apostles had more important work. Preparing these adult heathens for baptism by the continual preaching of the word was of much greater consequence than baptizing them when thus prepared to receive and profit by it.

Not with wisdom of words - Ουκ εν σοφιᾳ λογου. In several places in the New Testament the term λογος is taken not only to express a word, a speech, a saying, etc., but doctrine, or the matter of teaching. Here, and in 1Thes 1:5, and in several other places, it seems to signify reason, or that mode of rhetorical argumentation so highly prized among the Greeks. The apostle was sent not to pursue this mode of conduct, but simply to announce the truth; to proclaim Christ crucified for the sin of the world; and to do this in the plainest and simplest manner possible, lest the numerous conversions which followed might be attributed to the power of the apostle's eloquence, and not to the demonstration of the Spirit of God. It is worthy of remark that, in all the revivals of religion with which we are acquainted, God appears to have made very little use of human eloquence, even when possessed by pious men. His own nervous truths, announced by plain common sense, though in homely phrase, have been the general means of the conviction and conversion of sinners. Human eloquence and learning have often been successfully employed in defending the outworks of Christianity; but simplicity and truth have preserved the citadel.

It is farther worthy of remark, that when God was about to promulgate his laws he chose Moses as the instrument, who appears to have labored under some natural impediment in his speech, so that Aaron his brother was obliged to be his spokesman to Pharaoh; and that, when God had purposed to publish the Gospel to the Gentile world - to Athens, Ephesus, Corinth, and Rome, he was pleased to use Saul of Tarsus as the principal instrument; a man whose bodily presence was weak, and his speech contemptible, 2Cor 10:1, 2Cor 10:10. And thus it was proved that God sent him to preach, not with human eloquence, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect but with the demonstration and power of his own Spirit; and thus the excellence of the power appeared to be of God, and not of man.
Copyright information for Clarke