1Cor 1:14-17 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 14. I thank God , etc. Why Paul did not himself baptize, see in @1Co 1:17 . To him it was now a subject of grateful reflection that he had not done it. He had not given any occasion for the suspicion that he had intended to set himself up as a leader of a sect or party. But Crispus . Crispus had been the chief ruler of the synagogue at Corinth, . And Gaius . Gaius resided at Corinth, and at his house Paul resided when he wrote the epistle to the Romans, . It is also possible that the third epistle of John was directed to this man. See . And if so, then probably Diotrephes, , who is mentioned as one who loved "to have the pre-eminence," had been one cause of the difficulties at Corinth. The other persons at Corinth had been probably baptized by Silas and Timothy. (c) "Crispus" (d) "Gaius"

1 Corinthians 1:14-17

Verse 14. I thank God, etc. Why Paul did not himself baptize, see in @1Co 1:17. To him it was now a subject of grateful reflection that he had not done it. He had not given any occasion for the suspicion that he had intended to set himself up as a leader of a sect or party.

But Crispus. Crispus had been the chief ruler of the synagogue at Corinth, Actsts 18:8.

And Gaius. Gaius resided at Corinth, and at his house Paul resided when he wrote the epistle to the Romans, Rom 16:23. It is also possible that the third epistle of John was directed to this man. See 3Jn 1:1. And if so, then probably Diotrephes, 3Jn 1:9, who is mentioned as one who loved "to have the pre-eminence," had been one cause of the difficulties at Corinth. The other persons at Corinth had been probably baptized by Silas and Timothy.

(c) "Crispus" Acts 18:8 (d) "Gaius" Rom 16:23, 3Jn 1:1 Verse 15. Lest any should say. Lest any of those who had been baptized should pervert his design, and say that Paul had baptized them unto himself; or, lest any others should, with any appearance of truth, say that he had sought to make disciples to himself. The Ethiopic version renders this, "That ye should not say we were baptized in his name." Many of the ancient MSS. read this, "Lest any should say that ye were baptised into my name."--Mill Verse 16. And I baptised also the household. The family. Whether there were any infants in the family, does not appear. It is certain that the family was among the first converts to Christianity in Achaia, and that it had evinced great zeal in aiding those who were Christians. See 1Cor 16:15. From the manner in which Paul mentions this, it is probable that Stephanas did not reside at Corinth when he was baptized, though he might have subsequently removed there. "I baptized none of you, 1Cor 1:14, i.e., none of those who permanently dwelt at Corinth, or who were members of the original church there, but Crispus and Gaius--but I baptized also the family of Stephanas, now of your number." Or it may mean, "I baptized none of you who are adult members of the church, but Crispus and Gaius, though I also baptized the family of Stephanas." If this be the true interpretation, then it forms an argument to prove that Paul practised household baptism, or the baptism of the families of those who were themselves believers. Or the expression may simply indicate a recollection of the true circumstances of the case-- a species of correction of the statement in 1Cor 1:14, "I recollect now also that I baptized the family of Stephanas."

Household. αικον. The house; the family. The word comprises the whole family, including adults, domestics, slaves, and children. It includes,

(1.) the men in a house, Actst 7:10, 1Timm 3:4,5,12;

(2.)domestics, Acts 10:2, 11:14, 16:15,31, 1Timm 3:4;

(3.)the family in general, Lk 10:5, 16:27. (Bretschneider.) It was the custom, doubtless, for the apostles to baptize the entire household, whatever might be the age, including domestics, slaves, and children. The head of a family gave up the entire household to God.

Of Stephanas. Who Stephanas was, is not known. The Greek commentators say that he was the jailer of Philippi, who, after he had been baptized, (Acts 16:33,) removed with his family to Corinth. But of this there is no certain evidence.

Besides. Besides these.

I know not, etc. I do not know whether I baptized any others who are now members of that church. Paul would, doubtless, recollect that he had baptized others in other places, but he is speaking here particularly of Corinth. This is not to be urged as an argument against the inspiration of Paul, for

(1) it was not the design of inspiration to free the memory from defect in ordinary transactions, or in those things which were not to be received for the instruction of the church.

(2.) The meaning of Paul may simply be, "I know not who of the original members of the church at Corinth may have removed, or who may have died; I know not who may have removed to Corinth from other places where I have preached and baptized, and consequently I cannot know whether I may not have baptized some others of your present number." It is evident, however, that if he had baptized any others, the number was small.

(a) "besides" 1Cor 16:15,17 Verse 17. For Christ sent me not to baptize. That is, not to baptize as my main business. Baptism was not his principal employment, though he had a commission in common with others to administer the ordinance, and occasionally did it. The same thing was true of the Saviour, that he did not personally baptize, Jn 4:2. It is probable that the business of baptism was entrusted to the ministers of the church of inferior talents, or to those who were connected with the churches permanently, and not to those who were engaged chiefly in travelling from place to place. The reasons of this may have been,

(1.) that which Paul here suggests, that if the apostles had themselves baptized, it might have given occasion to strifes, and the formation of parties, as those who had been baptized by the apostles might claim some superiority over those who were not.

(2.) It is probable that the rite of baptism was preceded or followed by a course of instruction adapted to it; and as the apostles were ravelling from place to place, this could be better entrusted to those who were to be with them as their ordinary religious teachers. It was an advantage that those who imparted this instruction should also administer this ordinance.

(3.) It is not improbable, as Doddridge supposes, that the administration of this ordinance was entrusted to inferiors, because it was commonly practised by immersion, and was attended with some trouble and inconvenience, while the time of the apostles might be more directly occupied in their, main work.

But to preach the gospel. As his main business; as the leading, grand purpose of his ministry. This is the grand object of all ministers. It is not to build up a sect or party; it is not to secure simply the baptism of people in this or that communion; it is to make known the glad tidings of salvation, and call men to repentance and to God.

Not with wisdom of words. ουκενσοφιαλογου. Not in wisdom of speech, (margin.) The expression here is a Hebraism, or a form of speech common in the Hebrew writings, where a noun is used to express the meaning of an adjective; and means, not in wise words or discourse. The wisdom here mentioned refers, doubtless, to that which was common among the Greeks, and which was so highly valued. It included the following things:

(1.) Their subtle and learned mode of disputation, or that which was practised in their schools of philosophy.

(2.) A graceful and winning eloquence; the arts by which they sought to commend their sentiments, and to win others to their opinions. On this also the Greek rhetoricians greatly valued themselves; and this, probably, the false teachers endeavoured to imitate.

(3.) That which is elegant and finished in literature, in style and composition. On this the Greeks greatly valued themselves, as the Jews did on miracles and wonders. Comp. 1Cor 1:22. The apostle means to say, that the success of the gospel did not depend on these things; that he had not sought them; nor had he exhibited them in his preaching. His doctrine and his manner had not been such as to appear wise to the Greeks, and he had not depended on eloquence or philosophy for his success. Longinus (on the Sublime) enumerates Paul among men distinguished for eloquence; but it is probable that he was not distinguished for the graces of manner, (comp. 2Cor 10:1,10) so much as the strength and power of his reasoning.

Paul here introduces a new subject of discourse, which he pursues through this and the two following chapters--the effect of philosophy on the gospel, or the estimate which ought to be formed in regard to it. The reasons why he introduces this topic, and dwells upon it at such length, are not perfectly apparent. They are supposed to have been the following:

(1.) He had incidentally mentioned his own preaching, and his having been set apart particularly to that, 1Cor 1:17.

(2.) His authority, it is probable, had been called in question by the false teachers at Corinth.

(3.) The ground of this, or the reason why they undervalued him, had been, probably, that he had not evinced the eloquence of manner and the graces of oratory on which they so much valued themselves.

(4.) They had depended for their success on captivating the Greeks by the charms of graceful rhetoric and the refinements of subtle argumentation.

(5.) In every way, therefore, the deference paid to rhetoric and philosophy in the church, had tended to bring the pure gospel into disrepute; to produce faction; and to destroy the authority of the apostle. It was necessary, therefore, thoroughly to examine the subject, and to expose the real influence of the philosophy on which they placed so high a value.

Lest the cross of Christ. The simple doctrine that Christ was crucified to make atonement for the sins of men. This was the peculiarity of the gospel; and on this doctrine the gospel depended for success in the world.

Should be made of none effect. Should be rendered vain and ineffectual. That is, lest the success which might attend the preaching of the gospel should be attributed to the graces of eloquence, the charms of language, or the force of human argumentation, rather than to its true cause, the preaching of Christ crucified; or lest the attempt to recommend it by the charms of eloquence should divert the attention from the simple doctrines of the cross, and the preaching be really vain. The preaching of the gospel depends for its success on the simple power of its truths, borne by the Holy Spirit to the hearts of men; and not on the power of argumentation, and the charms of eloquence. To have adorned the gospel with the charms of Grecian rhetoric, would have obscured its wisdom and efficacy, just as the gilding of a diamond would destroy its brilliancy. True eloquence, and real learning, and sound sense, are not to be regarded as valueless; but their use in preaching is to convey the truth with plainness; to fix the mind on the pure gospel; and to leave the conviction on the heart, that this system is the power of God. The design of Paul here cannot be to condemn true eloquence and just reasoning, but to rebuke the vain parade, and the glittering ornaments, and dazzling rhetoric which were objects of so much esteem in Greece. A real belief of the gospel, a simple and natural statement of its sublime truths, will admit of, and prompt to, the most manly and noble kind of eloquence. The highest powers of mind, and the most varied learning, may find ample scope for the illustration and the defence of the simple doctrines of the gospel of Christ. But it does not depend for its success on these, but on its pure and heavenly truths, borne to the mind by the agency of the Holy Spirit.

(*) "not to baptize" "no so much to baptize" (+) "but to" "As to"