1 Corinthians 2:12-14

Verse 12. Now we have received. We who are Christians; and especially we the apostles. The following verse shows that he had himself and the other apostles chiefly in view; though it is true of all Christians that they have received, not the spirit of this world, but the Spirit which is of God.

Not the spirit of the world. Not the wisdom and knowledge which this world can give; not the learning and philosophy which were so much valued in Greece. The views of truth which we have, are not such as this world gives, but are such as are communicated by the Spirit of God.

But the Spirit which is of God. We are under the teachings and influence of the Holy Spirit.

That we might know. That we might fully understand and appreciate. The Spirit is given to us, in order that we might fully understand the favours which God has conferred on us in the gospel. It was not only necessary that God should grant the blessings of redemption by the gift of his Son; but, such was the hardness and blindness of the human heart, it was needful that he should grant his Holy Spirit also, that men might be brought fully to see and appreciate the value of those favours. For men do not see them by nature; neither does any one see them who is not enlightened by the Holy Spirit of God.

The things that are freely given us. That are conferred on us as a matter of grace or favour. He here refers to the blessings of redemption; the pardon of sin, justification, sanctification, the Divine favour and protection, and the hope of eternal life. These things we know; they are not matters of conjecture, but are surely and certainly confirmed to us by the Holy Spirit. It is possible for all Christians to know and be fully assured of the truth of those things, and of their interest in them.

(c) "the spirit" Rom 8:15 (d) "we might know" 1Jn 5:20 (*) "of God" "By God" Verse 13. Which things also we speak. Which great, and glorious, and certain truths, we, the apostles, preach and explain.

Not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth. Not such as human philosophy or eloquence would dictate. They do not have their origin in the devices of human wisdom, and they are not expressed in such words -of dazzling and attractive rhetoric as would be employed by those who pride themselves on the wisdom of this world.

But which the Holy Ghost teacheth. That is, in the words which the Holy Ghost imparts to us. Locke understands this as referring to the fact, that the apostles used "the language and expressions "which the Holy Ghost had taught in the revelations of the Scriptures. But this is evidently giving a narrow view of the subject. The apostle is speaking of the whole course of instruction by which the deep things of God were made known to the Christian church; and all this was not made known in the very words which were already contained in the Old Testament. He evidently refers to the fact that the apostles were themselves under the direction of the Holy Spirit, in the words and doctrines which they imparted; and this passage is a full proof that they laid claim to Divine inspiration. It is further observable that he says that this was done in such "words" as the Holy Ghost taught--referring not to the doctrines or subjects merely, but to the manner of expressing them. It is evident here that he lays claim to an inspiration in regard to the words which he used, or to the manner of his stating the doctrines of revelation. Words are the signs of thoughts; and if God designed that his truth should be accurately expressed in human language, there must have been a supervision over the words used, that such should be employed, and such only, as should accurately express the sense which he intended to convey.

Comparing spiritual things with spiritual. πνευματικοιςπνευματικα συγκρινοντες. This expression has been very variously interpreted; and is very difficult of explanation. Le Clerc renders it, "Speaking spiritual things to spiritual men." Most of the Fathers rendered it, "Comparing the things which were written by the Spirit of the Old Testament, with what is now revealed to us by the same Spirit, and confirming our doctrine by them." Calvin renders the word "comparing," by fitting, or adapting, (aptare,) and says that it means, that "he adapted spiritual things to spiritual men, while he accommodated words to the thing; that is, he tempered that celestial wisdom of the Spirit with simple language, and which conveyed by itself the native energy of the Spirit. Thus, he says, he reproves the vanity of those who attempted to secure human applause by a turgid and subtle mode of argument. Grotius accords with the Fathers, and renders it, "Explaining those things which the prophets spake by the Spirit of God, by those things which Christ has made known to us by his Spirit." Macknight renders it, "Explaining spiritual things in words taught by the Spirit." So Doddridge. The word rendered "comparing," συγκρινοντες, means, properly, to collect, join, mingle, unite together; then to separate or distinguish parts of things, and unite them into one; then to judge of the qualities of objects by carefully separating or distinguishing; then to compare for the purpose of judging, etc. As it means to compare one thing with another for the purpose of explaining its nature, it comes to signify, to interpret, to explain; and in this sense it is often used by the LXX. as a translation of --Phathar---to open, unfold, explain, (see Gen 40:8,16,22, 41:12,15;) also of to explain, (Nu 15:34;) and of the Chaldee, , (Dan 5:15,17.) See also Dan 2:4-7,9,16,24,26,30,36,45 Dan 4:3,4,6,16,17, 5:7,8,13,16,18,20, 7:16; in all which places the noun, συγκρισις is used in the same sense. In this sense the word is, doubtless, used here, and is to be interpreted in the sense of explaining, unfolding. There is no reason, either in the word here used, or in the argument of the apostle, why the sense of comparing should be retained.

Spiritual things. (πνευματικα.) Things, doctrines, subjects that pertain to the teaching of the Spirit. It does not mean things spiritual in opposition to fleshly; or intellectual in opposition to things pertaining to matter; but spiritual as the things referred to were such as were wrought, and revealed by the Holy Spirit--his doctrines on the subject of religion under the new dispensation, and his influence on the heart.

With spiritual. (πνευματικοις.) This is an adjective; and may be either masculine or neuter. It is evident that some noun is understood. That may be either,

(1.) ανθρωποις men--and then it will mean, "to spiritual men"--that is, to men who are enlightened or taught by the Spirit--and thus many commentators understand it; or,

(2,) it may be λογοις, words; and then it may mean, either that the "spiritual things" were explained by "words" and illustrations drawn from the writings of the Old Testament, inspired by the Spirit--as most of the Fathers and many moderns understand it; or that the "things spiritual" were explained by words which the Holy Spirit then communicated, and which were adapted to the subject--simple, pure, elevated; not gross, not turgid, not distinguished for rhetoric, and not such as the Greeks sought, but such as became the Spirit of God communicating great, sublime, yet simple truths to men. It will then mean, "Explaining doctrines that pertain to the Spirit's teaching and influence in words that are taught by the same Spirit, and that are fitted to convey in the most intelligent able manner those doctrines to men." Here the idea of the Holy Spirit's present agency is kept up throughout; the idea that he communicates the doctrine, and the mode of stating it to man. The supposition that λογοις (words) is the word understood here, is favoured by the fact that it occurs in the previous part of this verse. And if this be the sense, it means that the words which were used by the apostles were pure, simple, unostentatious, and undistinguished, by display--such as became doctrines taught by the Holy Spirit, when communicated in words suggested by the same Spirit.

(e) "not in the words" 1Cor 1:17 Verse 14. But the natural man. (ψυχικοςδεανθρωπος.) The word natural here stands opposed evidently to spiritual. It denotes those who are governed and influenced by the natural instincts; the animal passions and desires, in opposition to those who are influenced by the Spirit of God. It refers to unregenerate men; but it has also not merely the idea of their being unregenerate, but that of their being influenced by the animal passions or desires. 1Cor 15:44. The word sensual would correctly express the idea. The word is used by the Greek writers to denote that which man has in common with the brutes; to denote that they are under the influence of the senses, or the mere animal nature, in opposition to reason and conscience. Bretschneider. See 1Thes 5:23. Here it denotes that they are under the influence of the senses, or the animal nature, in opposition to being influenced by the Spirit of God. Macknight and Doddridge render it, "the animal man." Whitby understands by it the man who rejects revelation, the man who is under the influence of carnal wisdom. The word occurs but six times in the New Testament: 1Cor 15:44 twice, 1Cor 15:46, Jas 3:15 Jude 1:19. In 1Cor 15:44,46, it is rendered "natural," and is applied to the body as it exists before death, in contradistinction from that which shall exist after the resurrection-- called a spiritual body. In James 3:15, it is applied to wisdom: "This wisdom is earthly, surreal, devilish." In Jude 1:19, it is applied to sensual persons, or those who are governed by the senses, in opposition to those who are influenced by the Spirit: "These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit." The word here evidently denotes those who are under the influence of the senses; who are governed by the passions and the animal appetites, and natural desires; and who are uninfluenced by the Spirit of God. And it may be observed that this was the case with the great mass of the heathen world, even including the philosophers.

Receiveth not. ουδεχεται. Does not embrace or comprehend them. That is, he rejects them as folly; he does not perceive their beauty or their wisdom; he despises them. He loves other things better. A man of intemperance does not receive or love the arguments for temperance; a man of licentiousness, the arguments for chastity; a liar, the arguments for truth. So a sensual or worldly man does not receive or love the arguments for religion.

The things of the Spirit of God. The doctrines which are inspired by the Holy Spirit, and the things which pertain to his influence on the heart and life. The things of the Spirit of God here denote all the things which the Holy Spirit produces.

Neither can he know them. Neither can he understand or comprehend them. Perhaps, also, the word know here implies also the idea of loving, or approving of them, as it often does in the Scripture. Thus, to know the Lord often means to love him, to have a full, practical acquaintance with him. When the apostle says that the animal or sensual man cannot know those things, he may have reference to one of two things. Either,

(1.) that those doctrines were not discoverable by human wisdom, or by any skill which the natural man may have, but were to be learned only by revelation. This is the main drift of his argument, and this sense is given by Locke and Whitby. Or,

(2.) he may mean that the sensual, the unrenewed man cannot perceive their beauty and their force, even after they are revealed to man, unless the mind is enlightened and inclined by the Spirit of God. This is probably the sense of the passage. This is the simple affirmation of a fact, that while the man remains sensual and carnal, he cannot perceive the beauty of those doctrines. And this is a simple and well-known fact. It is a truth--universal and lamentable-that the sensual man, the worldly man, the proud, haughty, and self-confident man; the man under the influence of his animal appetites--licentious, false, ambitious, and vain--does not perceive any beauty in Christianity. So the intemperate man perceives no beauty in the arguments for temperance; the adulterer, no beauty in the arguments for chastity; the liar, no beauty in the arguments for truth. It is a simple fact, that while he is intemperate, or licentious, or false, he can perceive no beauty in these doctrines. But this does not prove that he has no natural faculties for perceiving the force and beauty of these arguments; or that he might not apply his mind to their investigation, and be brought to embrace them; or that he might not abandon the love of intoxicating drinks, and sensuality, and falsehood, and be a man of temperance, purity, and truth. He has all the natural faculties which are requisite in the case; and all the inability is his strong love of intoxicating drinks, or impurity, or falsehood. So of the sensual sinner. While he thus remains in love with sin, he cannot perceive the beauty of the plan of salvation, or the excellency of the doctrines of religion. He needs just the love of these things, and the hatred of sin. He needs to cherish the influences of the Spirit; to receive what he has taught, and not to reject it through the love of sin; he needs to yield himself to their influences, and then their beauty will be seen. The passage here proves that, while a man is thus sensual, the things of the Spirit will appear to him to be folly; it proves nothing about his ability, or his natural faculty, to see the excellency of these things, and to turn from his sin. It is the affirmation of a simple fact everywhere discernible, that the natural man does not perceive the beauty of these things; that while he remains in that state he cannot; and that if he is ever brought to perceive their beauty, it will be by the influence of the Holy Spirit. Such is his love of sin, that he never will be brought to see their beauty except by the agency of the Holy Spirit. "For wickedness perverts the judgment, and makes men err with respect to practical principles; so that no one can be wise and judicious who is not good."--Aristotle, as quoted by Bloomfield.

They are spiritually discerned. That is, they are perceived by the aid of the Holy Spirit enlightening the mind and influencing the heart.

(*) "natural man" "Carnal" (a) "receiveth not" Mt 13:11, Rom 8:5,7 (+) "discerned" "discerneth"

1 Corinthians 4:7

Verse 7. For who maketh, etc. This verse contains a reason for what Paul had just said; and the reason is, that all that any of them possessed had been derived from God, and no endowments whatever, which they had, could be laid as the foundation for self-congratulation and boasting. The apostle here doubtless has in his eye the teachers in the church of Corinth, and intends to show them that there was no occasion of pride or to assume pre-eminence. As all that they possessed had been given of God, it could not be the occasion of boasting or self-confidence.

To differ from another. Who has separated you from another; or who has made you superior to others. This may refer to everything in which one was superior to others, or distinguished from them. The apostle doubtless has reference to those attainments in piety, talents, or knowledge, by which one teacher was more eminent than others. But the same question may be applied to native endowments of mind; to opportunities of education; to the arrangements by which one rises in the world; to health; to property; to piety; to eminence and usefulness in the church. It is God who makes one, in any of these respects, to differ from others; and it is especially true in regard to personal piety. Had not God interfered and made a difference, all would have remained alike under sin. The race would have together rejected his mercy; and it is only by his distinguishing love that any are brought to believe and be saved.

And what hast thou. Either talent, piety, or learning.

That thou didst not receive? From God. By whatever means you have obtained it, it has been the gift of God.

Why dost thou glory, etc. Why dost thou boast as if it were the result of your own toil, skill, or endeavour. This is not designed to discourage human exertion; but to discourage a spirit of vainglory and boasting. A man who makes the most painful and faithful effort to obtain anything good, will, if successful, trace his success to God. He will still feel that it is God who gave him the disposition, the time, the strength, the success. And he will be grateful that he was enabled to make the effort; not vain, or proud, or boastful, because that he was successful. This passage states a general doctrine, that the reason why one man differs from another is to be traced to God; and that this fact should repress all boasting and glorying, and produce true humility in the minds of Christians. It may be observed, however, that it is as true of intellectual rank, of health, of wealth, of food, of raiment, of liberty, of peace, as it is of religion, that all come from God; and as this fact, which is so obvious and well known, does not repress the exertions of men to preserve their health and to obtain property, so it should not repress their exertions to obtain salvation. God governs the world on the same good principles everywhere; and the fact that he is the Source of all blessings should not operate to discourage, but should prompt to human effort. The hope of his aid and blessing is the only ground of encouragement in any undertaking.

(1) "who maketh" "distinguisheth thee" (c) "what hast thou" Jas 1:17

Hebrews 5:4

Verse 4. And no man taketh this honour to himself. No one has a right to enter on this office unless he has the qualifications which God has prescribed. There were fixed and definite laws in regard to the succession in the office of the high priest, and to the qualifications of him who should hold the office.

But he that is called of God, as was Aaron. Aaron was designated by name. It was necessary that his successors should have as clear evidence that they were called of God to the office, as though they had been mentioned by name. The manner in which the high priest was to succeed to the office was designated in the law of Moses, but in the time of Paul these rules were little regarded. The office had become venal, and was conferred at pleasure by the Roman rulers. Still it was true that, according to the law, to which alone Paul here refers, no one might hold this office but he who had the qualifications which Moses prescribed, and which showed that he was called of God. We may remark here,

(1.) that this does not refer so much to an internal as to an external call. He was to have the qualifications prescribed in the law; but it is not specified that he should be conscious of an internal call to the office, or be influenced by the Holy Spirit to it. Such a call was, doubtless, in the highest degree desirable, but it was not prescribed as an essential qualification.

(2.) This has no reference to the call to the work of the Christian ministry, and should not be applied to it. It should not be urged as a proof-text to show that a minister of the gospel should have a "call" directly from God, or that he should be called according to a certain order of succession. The object of Paul is not to state this, whatever may be the truth on this point. His object is to show that the Jewish high priest was called of God to his office in a certain way, showing that he held the appointment from God, and that therefore it was necessary that the great High Priest of the Christian profession should be called in a similar manner. To this alone the comparison should be understood as applicable.

(b) "no man" 2Chr 26:18 (c) "Aaron" Ex 28:1, Nu 16:40

James 1:17

Verse 17. Every good gift and every perfect gift. The difference between good and perfect here, it is not easy to mark accurately. It may be that the former means that which is benevolent in its character and tendency; the latter that which is entire, where there is nothing even apparently wanting to complete it; where it can be regarded as good as a whole and in all its parts. The general sense is, that God is the author of all good. Everything that is good on the earth we are to trace to him; evil has another origin. Compare Mt 13:28. Is from above. From God, who is often represented as dwelling above--in heaven.

And cometh down from the Father of lights. From God, the source and fountain of all light. Light, in the Scriptures, is the emblem of knowledge, purity, happiness; and God is often represented as light. Compare 1Jn 1:5; 1Timm 6:16. There is, doubtless, an allusion here to the heavenly bodies, among which the sun is the most brilliant. It appears to us to be the great original fountain of light, diffusing its radiance over all worlds. No cloud, no darkness seems to come from the sun, but it pours its rich effulgence on the farthest part of the universe. So it is with God. There is no darkness in him, (1Jn 1:5;) and all the moral light and purity which there is in the universe is to be traced to him. The word Father here is used in a sense which is common in Hebrew, (Mt 1:1,) as denoting that which is the source of anything, or that from which anything proceeds. Isa 9:6.

With whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. The design here is clearly to contrast God with the sun in a certain respect. As the source of light, there is a strong resemblance. But in the sun there are certain changes. It does not shine on all parts of the earth at the same time, nor in the same manner all the year. It rises and sets; it crosses the line, and seems to go far to the south, and sends its rays obliquely on the earth; then it ascends to the north, recrosses the line, and sends its rays obliquely on southern regions. By its revolutions it produces the changes of the seasons, and makes a constant variety on the earth in the productions of different climes. In this respect God is not indeed like the sun. With him there is no variableness, not even the appearance of turning. He is always the same, at all seasons of the year, and in all ages; there is no change in his character, his mode of being, his purposes and plans. What he was millions of ages before the worlds were made, he is now; what he is now, he will be countless millions of ages hence. We may be sure that whatever changes there may be in human affairs; whatever reverses we may undergo; whatever oceans we may cross, or whatever mountains we may climb, or in whatever worlds we may hereafter take up our abode, God is the same. The word which is here rendered variableness (παραλλαγη) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It means change, alteration, vicissitude, and would properly be applied to the changes observed in astronomy. See the examples quoted in Wetstein. The phrase rendered shadow of turning would properly refer to the different shade or shadow cast by the sun from an object, in its various revolutions, in rising and setting, and in its changes at the different seasons of the year. God, on the other hand, is as if the sun stood in the meridian at noon-day, and never cast any shadow.

(a) "every good gift" Jn 3:27 (b) "with whom is no variableness" 1Sam 15:29; Mal 3:6 (+) "gift" or, "benefit"
Copyright information for Barnes