1Cor 4-8 | Barnes | STEP | 1st Corinthians CHAPTER 4 THIS chapter is a continuation of the subject discussed in those which go before, and of the argument which closes the last chapter. The proper division would have been at verse 6. The design of the first six verses is to show the real estimate in which the apostles ought to be held as the ministers of religion. The remainder of the chapter ( ) is occupied in setting forth further the claims of the apostles to their respect in contradistinction from the false teachers, and in reproving the spirit of vain boasting and confidence among the Corinthians. Paul reproves their boasting by assuring them that they had no ground for it, since all that they possessed had been given to them by God. In , he reproves the same spirit with cutting irony, as if they claimed to be eminently wise. Still further to reprove them, he alludes to his own self-denials and sufferings, as contrasted with their ease, and safety, and enjoyment, . He then shows that his labours and self-denials, in their behalf, laid the foundation for his speaking to them with authority as a father, . And to show them that he claimed that authority over them as the founder of their church, and that he was not afraid to discharge his duty towards them, he informs them that he had sent Timothy to look into their affairs, , and that himself would soon follow; and assures them that he had power to come to them with the severity of Christian discipline, and that it depended on their conduct whether he should come with a rod, or with the spirit of meekness and love, . Verse 1. Let a man . Let all; let this be the estimate formed of us by each one of you. So account of us . So think of us, the apostles. As of the ministers of Christ . As the servants of Christ. Let them form a true estimate of us and our office--not as the head of a faction; not as designing to form parties, but as unitedly and entirely the servants of Christ. See . And stewards . Stewards were those who presided over the affairs of a family, and made provision for it, etc. . It was an office of much responsibility; and the apostle by using the term here seems to have designed to elevate those whom he seemed to have depreciated in . Of the mysteries of God . Of the gospel. . The office of steward was to provide those things which were necessary for the use of a family. And so the office of a minister of the gospel, and a steward of its mysteries, is to dispense such instructions, guidance, counsel, etc., as may be requisite to build up the church of Christ; to make known those sublime truths which are contained in the gospel, but which had not been made known before the revelation of Jesus Christ, and which are, therefore, called mysteries . It is implied in this verse, (1.) that the office of a minister is one that is subordinate to Christ--they are his servants. (2.) That those in the office should not attempt to be the head of sect or party in the church. (3.) That the office is honourable, as that of a steward is. And, (4.) that Christians should endeavour to form and cherish just ideas of ministers; to give them their true honour; but not to overrate their importance. (*) "mysteries" "revealed truths"

1 Corinthians 4

1st Corinthians CHAPTER 4

THIS chapter is a continuation of the subject discussed in those which go before, and of the argument which closes the last chapter. The proper division would have been at verse 6. The design of the first six verses is to show the real estimate in which the apostles ought to be held as the ministers of religion. The remainder of the chapter (1Cor 4:7-21) is occupied in setting forth further the claims of the apostles to their respect in contradistinction from the false teachers, and in reproving the spirit of vain boasting and confidence among the Corinthians. Paul 1Cor 4:7 reproves their boasting by assuring them that they had no ground for it, since all that they possessed had been given to them by God. In 1Cor 4:8, he reproves the same spirit with cutting irony, as if they claimed to be eminently wise. Still further to reprove them, he alludes to his own self-denials and sufferings, as contrasted with their ease, and safety, and enjoyment, 1Cor 4:9-14. He then shows that his labours and self-denials, in their behalf, laid the foundation for his speaking to them with authority as a father, 1Cor 4:15,16. And to show them that he claimed that authority over them as the founder of their church, and that he was not afraid to discharge his duty towards them, he informs them that he had sent Timothy to look into their affairs, 1Cor 4:17, and that himself would soon follow; and assures them that he had power to come to them with the severity of Christian discipline, and that it depended on their conduct whether he should come with a rod, or with the spirit of meekness and love, 1Cor 4:21.

Verse 1. Let a man. Let all; let this be the estimate formed of us by each one of you.

So account of us. So think of us, the apostles.

As of the ministers of Christ. As the servants of Christ. Let them form a true estimate of us and our office--not as the head of a faction; not as designing to form parties, but as unitedly and entirely the servants of Christ. See 1Cor 3:5.

And stewards. Stewards were those who presided over the affairs of a family, and made provision for it, etc. Lk 16:1. It was an office of much responsibility; and the apostle by using the term here seems to have designed to elevate those whom he seemed to have depreciated in 1Cor 3:5.

Of the mysteries of God. Of the gospel. 1Cor 2:7. The office of steward was to provide those things which were necessary for the use of a family. And so the office of a minister of the gospel, and a steward of its mysteries, is to dispense such instructions, guidance, counsel, etc., as may be requisite to build up the church of Christ; to make known those sublime truths which are contained in the gospel, but which had not been made known before the revelation of Jesus Christ, and which are, therefore, called mysteries. It is implied in this verse,

(1.) that the office of a minister is one that is subordinate to Christ--they are his servants.

(2.) That those in the office should not attempt to be the head of sect or party in the church.

(3.) That the office is honourable, as that of a steward is. And,

(4.) that Christians should endeavour to form and cherish just ideas of ministers; to give them their true honour; but not to overrate their importance.

(*) "mysteries" "revealed truths" Verse 2. Moreover, etc. The fidelity required of stewards seems to be adverted to here, in order to show that the apostles acted from a higher principle than a desire to please man, or to be regarded as at the head of a party; and they ought so to esteem them as bound, like all stewards, to be faithful to the Master whom they served.

It is required, etc. It is expected of them; it is the main or leading thing in their office. Eminently in that office fidelity is required as an indispensable and cardinal virtue. Fidelity to the master, faithfulness to his trust, as THE virtue which by way of eminence is demanded there. In other offices other virtues may be particularly required. But here fidelity is demanded. This is required particularly because it is an office of trust; because the master's goods are at his disposal; because there is so much opportunity for the steward to appropriate those goods to his own use, so that his master cannot detect it. There is a strong similarity between the office of a steward and that of a minister of the gospel. But it is not needful here to dwell on the resemblance. The idea of Paul seems to be,

(1.) that a minister, like a steward, is devoted to his Master's service, and should regard himself as such.

(2.) That he should be faithful to that trust, and not abuse or violate it.

(3.) That he should not be judged by his fellow-stewards, or fellow-servants, but that his main desire should be to meet with the approbation of his Master. A minister should be faithful for obvious reasons: because

(a) he is appointed by Jesus Christ;

(b) because he must answer to him;

(d) because of the importance of the matter committed to his care; and the importance of fidelity can be measured only by the consequences of his labours to those souls in an eternal heaven or an eternal hell.

(b) "in stewards" Lk 12:42, Tit 1:7, 1Pet 4:10 Verse 3. But with me. In my estimate; in regard to myself. That is, I esteem it a matter of no concern. Since I am responsible as a steward to my Master only, it is a matter of small concern what men think of me, provided I have his approbation. Paul was not insensible to the good opinion of men. He did not despise their favour, or court their contempt. But this was not the principal thing which he regarded; and we have here a noble elevation of purpose and of aim, which shows how direct was his design to serve and please the Master who had appointed him to his office.

That I should be judged. The word rendered judged here properly denotes to examine the qualities of any person or thing; and sometimes, as here, to express the result of such examination or judgment. Here it means to blame or condemn.

Of you. By you. Dear as you are to me as a church and a people, yet my main desire is not to secure your esteem, or to avoid your censure, but to please my Master, and secure his approbation.

Or of man's judgment. Of any man's judgment. What he had just said, that he esteemed it to be a matter not worth regarding, whatever might be their opinion of him, might seem to look like arrogance, or appear as if he looked upon them with contempt. In order to avoid this construction of his language, he here says that it was not because he despised them, or regarded their opinion as of less value than that of others, but that he had the same feelings in regard to all men. Whatever might be their rank, character, talent, or learning, he regarded it as a matter of the least possible consequence what they thought of him. He was answerable not to them, but to his Master; and he could pursue an independent course, whatever they might think of his conduct. This is designed also evidently to reprove them for seeking so much the praise of each other. The Greek here is, "of man's day," where day is used, as it often is in Hebrew, to denote the day of trial; the day of judgment; and then simply judgment. Thus the word --day-- is used in Job 24:1, Ps 37:13, Joel 1:15, 2:1.

Yea, I judge not mine own self. I do not attempt to pronounce a judgment on myself. I am conscious of imperfection, and of being biased by self-love in my own favour. I do not feel that my judgment of myself would be strictly impartial, and in all respects to be trusted. Favourable as may be my opinion, yet I am sensible that I may be biased. This is designed to soften what he had just said about their judging him, and to show further the little value which is to be put on the judgment which man may form. "If I do not regard my own opinion of myself as of high value, I cannot be suspected of undervaluing you when I say that I do not much regard your opinion; and if I do not estimate highly my own opinion of myself, then it is not to be expected that I should set a high value on the opinions of others." God only is the infallible Judge; and as we and our fellow-men are liable to be biased in our opinions, from envy, ignorance, or self-love, we should regard the judgment of the world as of little value.

(1) "judgment" "day" Verse 4. For I know nothing by myself. There is evidently here an ellipsis to be supplied, and it is well supplied by Grotius, Rosenmuller, Calvin, etc.: "I am not conscious of evil, or unfaithfulness to myself; that is, in my ministerial life." It is well remarked by Calvin, that Paul does not here refer to the whole of his life, but only to his apostleship. And the sense is, "I am conscious of integrity in this office. My own mind does not condemn me of ambition or unfaithfulness. Others may accuse me, but I am not conscious of that which should condemn me, or render me unworthy of this office." This appeal Paul elsewhere makes to the integrity and faithfulness of his ministry. So his speech before the elders of Ephesus at Miletus, Acts 20:18,19,26,27; Compare 2Cor 7:2; 12:17. It was the appeal which a holy and faithful man could make to the integrity of his public life, and such as every minister of the gospel ought to be able to make.

Yet am I not hereby justified, I am not justified because I am not conscious of a failure in my duty, I know that God the Judge may see imperfections where I see none. I know that I may be deceived; and, therefore, I do not pronounce a judgment on myself as if it were infallible and final. It is not by the consciousness of integrity and faithfulness that I expect to be saved; and it does not follow that I claim to be free from all personal blame. I know that partiality to ourselves will often teach us to overlook many faults that others may discern in us.

He that judgeth me is the Lord. By his judgment I am to abide; and by his judgment I am to receive my eternal sentence, and not by my own view of myself. He searcheth the hearts. He may see evil where I see none. I would not, therefore, be self-confident; but would, with humility, refer the whole case to him. Perhaps there is here a gentle and tender reproof of the Corinthians, who were so confident in their own integrity; and a gentle admonition to them to be more cautious, as it was possible that the Lord would detect faults in them where they perceived none.

(+) "by myself" "For I am not conscious of any evil" (c) "by myself" Ps 143:2 Verse 5. Therefore. In view of the danger of being deceived in your judgment, and the impossibility of certainly knowing the failings of the heart.

Judge nothing. Pass no decided opinion. Mt 7:1. The apostle here takes occasion to inculcate on them an important lesson--one of the leading lessons of Christianity--not to pass a harsh opinion on the conduct of any man, since there are so many things that go to make up his character which we cannot know, and so many secret failings and motives which are all concealed from us.

Until the Lord come. The Lord Jesus at the day of judgment, when all secrets shall be revealed, and a true judgment shall, be passed on all men.

Who both will bring to light. Rom 2:16.

The hidden things of darkness. The secret things of the heart which have been hidden, as it were, in darkness. The subsequent clause shows that this is the sense. He does not refer to the deeds of night, or those things which were wrought in the secret places of idolatry, but to the secret designs of the heart; and perhaps means gently to insinuate that there were many things about the character and feelings of his enemies which would not well bear the revelations of that day.

The counsels of the hearts. The purposes, designs, and intentions of men. All their plans shall be made known in that day. And it is a most fearful and alarming truth, that no man can conceal his purposes beyond the day of judgment.

And then shall every man have praise of God. The word here rendered praise, επαινος, denotes in this place reward, or that which is due to him; the just sentence which ought to be pronounced on his character. It does not mean, as our translation would imply, that every man will then receive the Divine approbation-which will not be true; but that every man shall receive what is due to his character, whether good or evil. So Bloomfield and Bretschneider explain it. Hesychius explains it by judgment, κρισις. The word must be limited in its signification according to the subject or the connexion. The passage teaches,

(1.) that we should not be guilty of harsh judgment of others.

(2.) The reason is, that we cannot know their feelings and motives.

(3.) That all secret things will be brought forth in the great day, and nothing be concealed beyond that time.

(4.) That every man shall receive justice there. He shall be treated as he ought to be. The destiny of no one will be decided by the opinions of men; but the doom of all will be fixed by God. How important is it, therefore, that we be prepared for that day; and how important to cherish such feelings, and form such plans, that they may be developed without involving us in shame and contempt!

(a) "judge nothing" Mt 7:1 (b) "who both" Rom 2:16, Rev 20:12 Verse 6. And these things. The things which I have written respecting religious teachers, 1Cor 2:5,6, and the impropriety of forming sects called after their names.

I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos. The word here used, μετεσχηματισα denotes, properly, to put on another form or figure; to change, Php 3:21, "who shall change our vile body;" to transform, 2Cor 11:13, "transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ;" and then to apply in the way of a figure of speech. This may mean that neither Paul, Apollos, nor Peter, were set up among the Corinthians as heads of parties; but that Paul here made use of their names to show how improper it would be to make them the head of a party, and hence how improper it was to make any religious teacher the head of a party; or Paul may mean to say that he had mentioned himself and Apollos particularly, to show the impropriety of what had been done; since, if it was improper to make them heads of parties, it was much more so to make inferior teachers the leaders of factions. Locke adopts the former interpretation. The latter is probably the true interpretation; for it is evident, from 1Cor 1:12,13, that there were parties in the church at Corinth that were called by the names of Paul, and Apollos, and Peter; and Paul's design here was to show the impropriety of this by mentioning himself, Apollos, and Peter, and thus by transferring the whole discussion from inferior teachers and leaders to show the impropriety of it. He might have argued against the impropriety of following other leaders. He might have mentioned their names. But this would have been invidious and indelicate. It would have excited their anger. He therefore says that he had transferred it all to himself and Apollos; and it implied that if it were improper to split themselves up into factions with them as leaders, much more was it improper to follow others; i.e., it was improper to form parties at all in the church. "I mention this of ourselves; out of delicacy I forbear to mention the names of others." And this was one of the instances in which Paul showed great tact in accomplishing his object, and avoiding offence.

For your sakes. To spare your feelings; or to show you in an inoffensive manner what I mean. And particularly by this that you may learn not to place an inordinate value on men.

That ye might learn in us. Or by our example and views.

Not to think, etc. Since you see the plan which we desire to take; since you see that we who have the rank of apostles, and have been so eminently favoured with endowments and success, do not wish to form parties, that you may also have the same views in regard to others.

Above that which is written. Probably referring to what he had said in 1Cor 3:5-9,21, 4:1. Or it may refer to the general strain of Scripture, requiring the children of God to be modest and humble.

That no one of you be puffed up. That no one be proud or exalted in self-estimation above his neighbour. That no one be disposed to look upon others with contempt, and to seek to depress and humble them. They should regard themselves as brethren, and as all on a level. The argument here is, that if Paul and Apollos did not suppose that they had a right to put themselves at the head of parties, much less had any of them a right to do so. The doctrine is,

(1.) that parties are improper in the church;

(2.) that Christians should regard themselves as on a level; and,

(3.) that no one Christian should regard others as beneath him, or as the object of contempt. 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 Verse 8. Now ye are full. It is generally agreed that this is spoken in irony, and that it is an indignant sarcasm uttered against the false and self-confident teachers in Corinth. The design is to contrast them with the apostles; to show how self-confident and vain the false teachers were, and how laborious and self-denying the apostles were; and to show to them how little claim they had to authority in the church, and the real claim which the apostles had from their self-denials.and labours. The whole passage is an instance of most pungent and cutting sarcasm, and shows that there may be occasions when irony may be proper, though it should be rare. An instance of cutting irony occurs also in regard to the priests of Baal, in 1Kgs 18:27. The word translated "ye are full," κεκορεσμενοι occurs only here, and in Acts 27:38, "And when they had eaten enough." It is usually applied to a feast, and denotes those who are satiated or satisfied. So here it means, "You think you have enough. You are satisfied with your conviction of your own knowledge, and do not feel your need of anything more.

Ye are rich. This is presenting the same idea in a different form. "You esteem yourselves to be rich in spiritual gifts and graces, so that you do not feel the necessity of any more."

Ye have reigned as kings. This is simply carrying forward the idea before stated; but in the form of a climax. The first metaphor is taken from person filled with food; the second from those who are so rich that they do not feel their want of more; the third from those who are raised to a throne, the highest elevation, where there was nothing further to be reached or desired. And the phrase means, that they had been fully satisfied with their condition and attainments, with their knowledge and power, that they lived like rich men and princes --revelling, as it were, on spiritual enjoyments, and disdaining all foreign influence, and instruction, and control.

Without us. Without our counsel and instruction. You have taken the whole management of matters on yourselves, without any regard to our advice or authority. You did not feel your need of our aid; and you did not regard our authority. You supposed you could get along as well without us as with us.

And I would to God ye did reign. Many interpreters have understood this as if Paul had really expressed a wish that their were literal princes, that they might afford protection to him in his persecution and troubles. Thus Grotius, Whitby, Locke, Rosenmuller, and Doddridge. But the more probable interpretation is, that Paul here drops the irony, and addresses them in a sober, earnest manner. It is the expression of a wish that they were as truly happy and blessed as they thought themselves to be. "I wish that you were so abundant in all spiritual improvements; I wish that you had made such advances that you could be represented as full, and as rich, and as princes, needing nothing, that when I came I might have nothing to do but to partake of your joy." So Calvin, Lightfoot, Bloomfield. It implies,

(1.) a wish that they were truly happy and blessed;

(2.) a doubt implied whether they were then so; and,

(3.) a desire on the part of Paul to partake of their real and true joy, instead of being compelled to come to them with the language of rebuke and admonition. See 1Cor 4:19,21.

(a) "ye are rich" Rev 3:17 Verse 9. For I think. It seems to me. Grotius thinks that this is to be taken ironically, as if he had said, "It seems, then, that God has designed that we, the apostles, should be subject to contempt and suffering, and be made poor and persecuted, while you are admitted to high honours and privileges." But probably this is to be taken as a serious declaration of Paul, designed to show their actual condition and trials, while others were permitted to live in enjoyment. Whatever might be their condition, Paul says that the condition of himself and his fellow-labourers was one of much contempt and sufferings; and the inference seems to be, that they ought to doubt whether they were in a right state, or had any occasion for their self-congratulation, since they so little resembled those whom God had set forth.

Hath set forth. Has showed us; or placed us in public view.

The apostles last. Marg., Or, the last apostles, τουςαποστολους εσχατους. Grotius supposes that this means, in the lowest condition; the humblest state; a condition like that of beasts. So Tertullian renders it. And this interpretation is the correct one, if the passage be ironical. But Paul may mean to refer to the custom of bringing forth those in the amphitheatre, at the conclusion of the spectacles, who were to fight with other men, and who had no chance of escape. These inhuman games abounded everywhere; and an allusion to them would be well understood, and is indeed often made by Paul. Comp. 1Cor 9:26, 1Timm 6:12, 2Ti 4:7. See Seneca, Epis. chap. vii. This interpretation receives support from the words which are used here, "God hath exhibited," "spectacle," or theatre, which are all applicable to such an exhibition. Calvin, Locke, and others, however, suppose that Paul refers to the fact that he was the last of the apostles; but this interpretation does not suit the connexion of the passage.

As it were. ως. Intimating the certainty of death.

Appointed to death, επιθανατιους. Devoted to death. The word occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It denotes the certainty of death; or the fact of being destined to death; and implies that such were their continued conflicts, trials, persecutions, that it was morally certain that they would terminate in their death, and only when they died, as the last gladiators on the stage were destined to contend until they should die. This is a very strong expression; and denotes the continuance, the constancy, and the intensity of their sufferings in the cause of Christ.

We are made a spectacle. Marg., theatre. θεατρον. The theatre, or amphitheatre of the ancients, was composed of an arena, or level floor, on which the combatants fought, and which was surrounded by circular seats rising above one another to a great height, and capable of containing many thousand spectators. Paul represents himself as on this arena or stage, contending with foes, and destined to death. Around him and above him are an immense host of men and angels, looking on at the conflict, and awaiting the issue. He is not alone or unobserved. He is made public; and the universe gazes on the struggle. Angels and men denote the universe, as gazing upon the conflicts and struggles of the apostles. It is a vain inquiry here, whether he means good or bad angels. The expression means that he was public in his trials, and that this was exhibited to the universe. The whole verse is designed to convey the idea that God had, for wise purposes, appointed them in the sight of the universe, to pains, and trials, and persecutions, and poverty, and want, which would terminate only in their death. See Heb 12:1, etc. What these trials were he specifies in the following verses.

(1) "apostles" "the last apostles" (*) "appointed" "devoted" (b) "we are" Heb 10:33 (2) "spectacle" "theatre" Verse 10. We are fools. This is evidently ironical. "We are doubtless foolish men, but ye are wise in Christ. We, Paul, Apollos, and Barnabas [Cephas], have no claims to the character of wise men--we are to be regarded as fools, unworthy of confidence, and unfit to instruct; but you are full of wisdom."

For Christ's sake. διαχριστον. On account of Christ; or in reference to his cause, or in regard to the doctrines of the Christian religion.

But ye are wise in Christ. The phrase, "in Christ," does not differ in signification materially from the one above, "for Christ's sake." This is wholly ironical, and is exceedingly pungent. "You, Corinthians, boast of your wisdom and prudence. You are to be esteemed very wise. You are unwilling to submit to be esteemed fools. You are proud of your attainments. We, in the mean time, who are apostles, and who have founded your church, are to be regarded as fools, and as unworthy of public confidence and esteem. The whole design of irony is to show the folly of their boasted wisdom. That they only should be wise and prudent, and the apostles fools, was in the highest degree absurd; and this absurdity the apostle puts in a strong light by his irony.

We are weak. We are timid and feeble, but you are daring, bold, and fearless. This is irony. The very reverse was probably true. Paul was bold, daring, fearless in declaring the truth, whatever opposition it might encounter; and probably many of them were timid and time-serving, and endeavouring to avoid persecution, and to accommodate themselves to the prejudices and opinions of those who were wise in their own sight; the prejudices and opinions of the world.

Ye are honourable. Deserving of honour, and obtaining it. Still ironical. You are to be esteemed as worthy of praise.

We are despised. ατιμοι. Not only actually contemned, but worthy to be so. This was irony also. And the design was to show them how foolish was their self-confidence and self-flattery, and their attempt to exalt themselves. Verse 11. Even unto this present hour. Paul here drops the irony, and begins a serious recapitulation of his actual sufferings and trials. The phrase here used, "unto this present hour," denotes that these things had been incessant through all their ministry. They were not merely at the commencement of their work, but they had continued and attended them everywhere. And even then they were experiencing the same thing. These privations and trials were still continued, and were to be regarded as a part of the apostolic condition.

We both hunger and thirst. The apostles, like their Master, were poor; and, in travelling about from place to place, it often happened that they scarcely found entertainment of the plainest kind, or had money to purchase it. It is no dishonour to be poor, and especially if that poverty is produced by doing good to others. Paul might have been rich, but he chose to be poor for the sake of the gospel. To enjoy the luxury of doing good to others, we ought to be willing to be hungry and thirsty, and to be deprived of our ordinary enjoyments.

And are naked. In travelling, our clothes become old and worn out, and we have no friends to replace them, and no money to purchase new. It is no discredit to be clad in mean raiment, if that is produced by self-denying toils in behalf of others. There is no honour in gorgeous apparel; but there is real honour in voluntary poverty and want, when produced in the cause of benevolence. Paul was not ashamed to travel, to preach, and to appear before princes and kings, in a soiled and worn-out garment, for it was worn out in the service of his Master, and Divine Providence had arranged the circumstances of his life. But how many a minister now would be ashamed to appear in such clothing! How many professed Christians are ashamed to go to the house of God because they cannot dress well, or be in the fashion, or outshine their neighbours! If an apostle was willing to be meanly clad in delivering the message of God, then assuredly we should be willing to preach, or to worship him in such clothing as he provides. We may add here, what a sublime spectacle was here; and what a glorious triumph of the truth? Here was Paul with an impediment in his speech; with a personage small and mean rather than graceful, and in a mean and tattered dress, and often in chains, yet delivering truth before which kings trembled, and which produced everywhere a deep impression on the human mind. Such was the power of the gospel then! And such triumph did the truth then have over men. See Doddridge.

And are buffeted. Struck with the hand, Mt 26:67. Probably it is here used to denote harsh and injurious treatment in general. Comp. 2Cor 12:7.

And have no certain dwelling-place. No fixed or permanent home. They wandered to distant lands; threw themselves on the hospitality of strangers, and even of the enemies of the gospel; when driven from one place they went to another; and thus they led a wandering, uncertain life, amidst strangers and foes. They who know what are the comforts of home; who are surrounded by beloved families; who have a peaceful and happy fireside; and who enjoy the blessings of domestic tranquillity, may be able to appreciate the trials to which the apostles were subjected. All this was for the sake of the gospel; all to purchase the blessings which we so richly enjoy.

(a) "naked" Rom 8:35 (*) "buffeted" "beaten" Verse 12. And labour, etc. This Paul often did. Acts 18:3. Comp. Acts 20:34, 1Thes 2:9, 2Thes 3:8.

Being reviled. That they were often reviled or reproached, their history everywhere shows. See the Acts of the Apostles. They were reviled or ridiculed by the Gentiles as Jews; and by all as Nazarenes, and as deluded followers of Jesus; as the victims of a foolish superstition and enthusiasm.

We bless. We return good for evil. In this they followed the explicit direction of the Saviour. Mt 5:44. The main idea in these passages is, that they, were reviled, were persecuted, etc. The other clauses, "we bless," "we suffer it," etc., seem to be thrown in by the way to show how they bore this ill-treatment. As if he had said, "We are reviled; and what is more, we bear it patiently, and return good for evil." At the same time that he was recounting his trials, he was, therefore, incidentally instructing them in the nature of the gospel, and showing how their sufferings were to be borne; and how to illustrate the excellency of the Christian doctrine.

Being persecuted. Mt 5:11.

We suffer it. We sustain it; we do not revenge it; we abstain from resenting or resisting it.

(b) "labour" Acts 20:34 (c) "reviled" Mt 5:44, Acts 7:60 (+) "suffer" "bear" Verse 13. Being defamed. Greek, Blasphemed, i.e., spoken of and to, in a harsh, abusive, and reproachful manner. The original and proper meaning of the word is, to speak in a reproachful manner of any one, whether of God or man. It is usually applied to God, but it may also be used of men.

We entreat. Either God in their behalf, praying him to forgive them, or we entreat them to turn from their sins, and become converted to God. Probably the latter is the sense. They besought them to examine more candidly their claims, instead of reviling them; and to save their souls by embracing the gospel, instead of destroying them by rejecting it with contempt and scorn.

We are made. We became; we are so regarded or esteemed. The word here does not imply that there was any positive agency in making them such, but simply that they were in fact so regarded.

As the filth of the earth. It would not be possible to employ stronger expressions to denote the contempt and scorn with which they were everywhere regarded. The word filth περικαθαρματα occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It properly denotes filth, or that which is collected by sweeping a house; or that which is collected and cast away by purifying or cleansing anything: hence any vile, worthless, and contemptible object. Among the Greeks, the word was used to denote the victims which were offered to expiate crimes; and particularly men of ignoble rank, and of a worthless and wicked character, who were kept to be offered to the gods in a time of pestilence, to appease their anger, and to purify the nation. (Bretschneider and Schleusner.) Hence it was applied by them to men of the most vile, abject, and worthless character. But it is not certain that Paul had any reference to that sense of the word. The whole force of the expression may be met by the supposition that he uses it in the sense of that filth or dirt which is collected by the process of cleansing or scouring anything, as being vile, contemptible, worthless. So the apostles were regarded. And by the use of the word world here, he meant to say that they were regarded as the most vile and worthless men which the whole world could furnish; not only the refuse of Judea, but of all the nations of the earth. As if he had said, "More vile and worthless men could not be found on the face of the earth."

And are the off-scouring of all things. This word περιψημα occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It does not differ materially from the word rendered filth. It denotes that which is rubbed off by scouring or cleaning anything; and hence anything vile or worthless; or a vile and worthless man. This term was also applied to vile and worthless men who were sacrificed or thrown into the sea as an expiatory offering, as it were, to purify the people. Suidas remarks, that they said to such a man, "Be then our περιψημα," our redemption, and then flung him into the sea as a sacrifice to Neptune. See Whitby, Calvin, Doddridge.

Unto this day. Continually. We have been constantly so regarded. See 1Cor 4:11.

(++) "entreat" "exhort" (&) "earth" "As the vilest of the world" (d) "off-scouring" Lam 3:45 Verse 14. To shame you. It is not my design to put you to shame by showing you how little you suffer in comparison with us. This is not our design, though it may have this effect. I have no wish to make you ashamed, to appear to triumph over you, or merely to taunt you. My design is higher and nobler than this.

But as my beloved sons. As my dear children. I speak as a father to his children, and I say these things for your good. No father would desire to make his children ashamed. In his counsels, entreaties, and admonitions, he would have a higher object than that.

I warn you. I do not say these things in a harsh manner, with a severe spirit of rebuke; but in order to admonish you, to suggest counsel, to instil wisdom into the mind. I say these things not to make you blush, but with the hope that they may be the means of your reformation, and of a more holy life. No man, no minister, ought to reprove another merely to overwhelm him with shame, but the object should always be to make a brother better; and the admonition should be so administered as to have this end, not sourly or morosely, but in a kind, tender, and affectionate manner.

(|) "sons" "children" (e) "I warn you" 1Thes 2:11 Verse 15. For though ye have ten thousand instructors. Though you may have, or though you should have. It matters not how many you have, yet it is still true that I only sustain the relation to you of spiritual father; and whatever respect it is proper for you to have toward them, yet there is a peculiar right which I have to admonish you, and a peculiar deference which is due to me, from my early labours among you, and from the fact that you are my spiritual children.

Instructors. Greek, Pedagogues; or those who conducted children to school, and who superintended their conduct out of school-hours. Hence those who had the care of children, or teachers in general. It is then applied to instructors of any kind.

In Christ. In the Christian system or doctrine. The authority which Paul claims here, is that which a father has in preference to such an instructor.

Not many fathers. Spiritual fathers. That is, you have but one. You are to remember that however many teachers you have, yet that I alone am your spiritual father.

In Christ Jesus. By the aid and authority of Christ. I have begotten you by preaching his gospel and by his assistance.

I have begotten you. I was the instrument of your conversion.

Through the gospel. By means of the gospel; by preaching it to you; that is, by the truth. Verse 16. Wherefore. Since I am your spiritual father.

Be ye followers of me. Imitate me; copy my example; listen to my admonitions. Probably Paul had particularly in his eye their tendency, to form parties; and here admonishes them that he had no disposition to form sects, and entreats them in this to imitate his example. A minister should always so live as that he can, without pride or ostentation, point to his own example; and entreat his people to imitate him. He should have such a confidence in his own integrity; he should lead such a blameless life; and he should be assured that his people have so much evidence of his integrity, that he can point them to his own example, and entreat them to live like himself. And to do this, he should live a life of piety, and should furnish such evidence of a pure conversation, that his people may have reason to regard him as a holy man.

(*) "followers" "imitators" Verse 17. For this cause. In order to remind you of my doctrines and my manner Of life. Since I am hindered from coming myself, I have sent a fellow-labourer as my messenger, well acquainted with my views and feelings, that he might do what I would do if I were present.

Have I sent unto you Timotheus. Timothy, the companion and fellow-labourer of Paul. This was probably when Paul was at Ephesus. He sent Timothy and Erastus into Macedonia, probably with instructions to go to Corinth if convenient. Yet it was not quite certain that Timothy would come to them; for, in 1Cor 16:10, he expresses a doubt whether he would. Paul was probably deeply engaged in Asia, and did not think it proper then for him to leave his field of labour. He probably supposed also, that Timothy, as his ambassador, would be able to settle the difficulties in Corinth as well as if he were himself present.

My beloved son. In the gospel. See Acts 16:1-3, 1Timm 1:2. He supposed, therefore, that they would listen to him with great respect.

And faithful in the Lord. A true Christian and a faithful servant of Christ; and who is, therefore, worthy of your confidence.

Of my ways. My doctrine, my teaching, my mode of life.

Which be in Christ. That is, my Christian life; my ministry; or my conduct as a Christian and a follower of the Saviour.

As I teach every where, etc. This was designed probably to show them that he taught them no new or peculiar doctrines; he wished them simply to conform to the common rules of the churches, and to be like their Christian brethren everywhere. The Christian church is founded everywhere on the same doctrines; is bound to obey the same laws; and is fitted to produce and cherish the same sprat. The same spirit that was required in Ephesus or Antioch, was required at Corinth; the same spirit that was required at Corinth, at Ephesus, or at Antioch, is required now.

(+) "Timotheus" "Timothy" (++) "remembrance" "Who will remind you" Verse 18. Now some are puffed up. They are puffed up with vain confidence; they say that I would not dare to come; that I would be afraid to appear among them, to administer discipline, to rebuke them, or to supersede their authority, Probably he had been detained by the demand on his services in other places, and by various providential hinderances from going there, until they supposed that he stayed away from fear. And possibly he might apprehend that they would think he had sent Timothy because he was afraid to come himself. Their conduct was an instance of the haughtiness and arrogance which men will assume when they suppose they are in no danger of reproof or punishment. Verse 19. But I will come. It is from no fear of them that I am kept away; and to convince them of this I will come to them speedily.

If the Lord will. If the Lord permit; if by his providence he allows me to go. Paul regarded the entering on a journey as dependent on the will of God; and felt that God had all in his hand. No purpose should be formed without a reference to his will; no plan without feeling that he can easily frustrate it, and disappoint us. See Jas 4:15.

And will know. I will examine; I will put to the test; I will fully understand.

Not the speech, etc. Not their vain and empty boasting; not their confident assertions, and their self-complacent views.

But the power. Their real power. I will put their power to the proof; I will see whether they are able to effect what they affirm; whether they have more real power than I have. I will enter fully into the work of discipline, and will ascertain whether they have such authority in the church, such a power of party and of combination, that they can resist me, and oppose my administration of the discipline which the church needs. "A passage," says Bloomfield, "which cannot, in nerve and rigour, or dignity and composed confidence, be easily paralleled, even in Demosthenes himself."

(a) "if the Lord" Jas 4:15 (&) "will" "permit" (b) "but the power" Gal 2:6 Verse 20. For the kingdom of God. The reign of God in the church, Mt 3:2; meaning here, probably, the power or authority which was to be exercised in the government and discipline of the church. Or it may refer to the manner in which the church had been established. "It has not been set up by empty boasting; by pompous pretensions; by confident assertions. Such empty boasts would do little in the great work of founding, governing, and preserving the church; and unless men have some higher powers than this, they are not qualified to be religious teachers and guides."

But in power.

(1.) In the miraculous power by which the church was established--the power of the Saviour and of the apostles in working miracles.

(2.) In the power of the Holy Ghost in the gift of tongues, and in his influence on the heart in converting men. 1Cor 1:18.

(3.) In the continual power which is needful to protect, defend, and govern the church. Unless teachers showed that they had such power, they were not qualified for their office.

(c) "kingdom of God" Rom 14:17 (|) "word" "speech" Verse 21. What will ye. It depends on yourselves how I shall come. If you lay aside your contentions and strifes; if you administer discipline as you should; if you give yourselves heartily and entirely to the work of the Lord, I shall come, not to reprove or to punish, but as a father and a friend. But if you do not heed my exhortations, or the labours of Timothy; if you still, continue your contentions, and do not remove the occasions of offence, I shall come with severity and the language of rebuke.

With a rod. To correct and punish.

In the spirit of meekness. Comforting and commending, instead of chastising. Paul intimates that this depended on themselves. They had the power, and it was their duty to administer discipline; but if they would not do it, the task would devolve on him as the founder and father of the church, and as entrusted with power by the Lord Jesus, to, administer the severity of Christian discipline, or to punish those who offended by bodily suffering. See 1Cor 5:6, 11:30. See also the case of Ananias and Sapphira, Acts 5:1, etc., and of Elymas the sorcerer, Acts 13:10,11.

(*) "ye" "imitators" (d) "shall I come" 2Cor 13:10 -------------------------------------------------------------------------

REMARKS ON 1st Corinthians Chapter 4

(1.) We should endeavour to form a proper estimate of the Christian ministry, 1Cor 4:1. We should regard ministers as the servants of Jesus Christ, and honour them for their Master's sake; and esteem them also in proportion to their fidelity. They are entitled to respect as the ambassadors of the Son of God; but that respect also should be in proportion to their resemblance of him, and their faithfulness in their work. They who love the ministers of Christ, who are like him, and who are faithful, love the Master that sent them; they who hate and despise them, despise him. See Mt 10:40-42.

(2.) Ministers should be faithful, 1Cor 4:2. They are the stewards of Christ. They are appointed by him. They are responsible to him. They have a most important trust--more important than any other stewards; and they should live in such a manner as to receive the approbation of their Master.

(3.) It is of little consequence what the world thinks of us, 1Cor 4:3. A good name is on many accounts desirable; but it should not be the leading consideration; nor should we do anything merely to obtain it. Desirable as is a fair reputation, yet the opinion of the world is not to be too highly valued; for,

1st, it often misjudges;

2nd, it is prejudiced for or against us;

3rd, it is not to decide our final destiny;

4th, to desire that simply is a selfish and base passion.

(4.) The esteem even of friends is not to be the leading object of life, 1Cor 4:2. This is valuable, but not so valuable as the approbation of God. Friends are partial; and even where they do not approve our course, if we are conscientious, we should be willing to bear with their disapprobation. A good conscience is everything. The approbation even of friends cannot help us in the day of judgment.

(5.) We should distrust ourselves, 1Cor 4:3,4. We should not pronounce too confidently on our motives or our conduct. We may be deceived. There may be much even in our own motives that may elude our most careful inquiry, This should teach us humility, and self-distrust, and charity. Knowing our own liableness to misjudge ourselves, we should look with kindness on the faults and feelings of others.

(6.) We see here the nature of the future judgment, 1Cor 4:5.

1st. The hidden things of darkness will be brought out--all the secret crimes, and plans, and purposes of men, will be developed. All that has been done in secret, in darkness, in the night, in palaces and in prisons, will be developed. What a development will take place in the great day when the secret crimes of a world shall be revealed; and when all that has now escaped the notice of men, and the punishment of courts, shall be brought out!

2nd. Every man's secret thoughts shall be revealed. There will be no concealment then. All that we have devised or desired; all the thoughts that we have forgotten, shall there be brought out to noonday. How will the sinner tremble when all his thoughts are made known! Suppose, unknown to him, some person had been writing down all that a man has thought for a day, a week, or a year, and should begin to read it to him. Who is there that would not hang his head with shame, and tremble at such a record? Yet at the day of judgment the thoughts of the whole life will be revealed.

3rd. Every man shall be judged as he ought to be. God is impartial. The man that ought to be saved, will be; the man that ought not, will not be. How solemn will be the impartial trial of the world! Who can think of it but with alarm!

(7.) We have no occasion for pride or vain-boasting, 1Cor 4:7. All that we have of beauty, health, wealth, honour, grace, has been given to us by God. For what he has given us we should be grateful; but it should not excite pride. It is indeed valuable, because God gives it; and we should remember his mercies, but we should-not boast. We have nothing to boast of. Had we our deserts, we should be driven away in his wrath, and made wretched. That any are out of hell is matter of thankfulness; that one possesses more than another, proves that God is a sovereign, and not that we are more worthy than another, or that there is by nature any ground of preference which one has over another.

(8.) Irony and sarcasm are sometimes lawful and proper, 1Cor 4:8-10. But it is not often as safe as it was in the hands of the apostle Paul. Few men can regulate the talent properly; few should allow themselves to indulge in it. It is rarely employed in the Bible; and it is rarely employed elsewhere where it does not do injury. The cause of truth can be usually sustained by sound argument; and that which cannot be thus defended is not worth defence. Deep wounds are often made by the severity of wit and irony; and an indulgence in this usually prevents a man from having a single friend.

(9.) We see from this chapter what religion has cost, 1Cor 4:9-13. Paul states the sufferings that he and the other apostles endured in order to establish it. They were despised, and persecuted, and poor, and regarded as the refuse of the world. The Christian religion was founded on the blood of its Author, and has been reared amidst the sighs and tears of its friends. All its early advocates were subjected to persecution and trial; and to engage in this work involved the certainty of being a martyr. We enjoy not a blessing which has not thus been purchased; and which has not come to us through the self-denials and toils of the best men that the earth has known. Persecution raged around all the early friends of the church; and it rose and spread while the fire of martyrdom spread, and while its friends were everywhere cast out as evil, and called to bleed in its defence.

(10.) We have here an illustrious instance of the manner in which reproach, and contempt, and scorn should be borne, 1Cor 4:12,13. The apostles imitated the example of their Master, and followed his precepts. They prayed for their enemies, persecutors, and slanderers. There is nothing but religion that can produce this spirit; and this can do it always. The Saviour evinced it; his apostles evinced it; and all should evince it, who profess to be its friends. We may remark:

1st. This is not produced by nature. It is the work of grace alone.

2nd. It is the very spirit and genius of Christianity to produce it.

3rd. Nothing but religion will enable a man to bear it, and will produce this temper and spirit.

4th. We have an instance here of what all Christians should evince. All should be in this like the apostles. All should be like the Saviour himself.

(11.) We have an argument here for the truth of the Christian religion. The argument is founded on the fact that the apostles were willing to suffer so much in order to establish it. They professed to have been eye-witnesses of what they affirmed. They had nothing to gain by spreading it, if it was not true. They exposed themselves to persecution on this account, and became willing to die rather than deny its truth. Take, for example, the case of the apostle Paul.

1st. He had every prospect of honour and of wealth in his own country. He had been liberally educated, and had the confidence of his countrymen. He might have risen to the highest station of trust or influence. He had talents which would have raised him to distinction anywhere.

2nd. He could not have been mistaken in regard to the events connected with his conversion, Acts 9. The scene, the voice, the light, the blindness, were all things which could not have been counterfeited. They were open and public. They did not occur "in a corner."

3rd. He had no earthly motive to change his course. Christianity was despised when he embraced it; its friends were few and poor; and it had no prospect of spreading through the world. It conferred no wealth; bestowed no diadem; imparted no honours; gave no ease; conducted to no friendship of the great and the mighty. It subjected its friends to persecution, and tears, and trials, and death. What should induce such a man to make such a change? Why should Paul have embraced this, but from a conviction of its truth? How could he be convinced of that truth except by some argument that should be so strong as to overcome his hatred to it, make him willing to renounce all his prospects for it--to encounter all that the world could heap upon him, and even death itself, rather than deny it? But such a religion had a higher than any earthly origin, and must have been from God.

(12.) We may expect to suffer reproach. It has been the common lot of all, from the time of the Master himself to the present. Jesus was reproached; the apostles were reproached; the martyrs were reproached; and we are not to be surprised that ministers and Christians are called to like trials now. It is enough "for the disciple that he be as his Master, and the servant as his Lord."

1 Corinthians 5

Introduction to 1st Corinthians Chapter 5

CHAPTER V

This chapter is entirely occupied with a notice of an offence which existed in the church at Corinth, and with a statement of the measures which the apostle expected them to pursue in regard to it. Of the existence of this offence he had been informed, probably by "those of the house of Chloe," 1Cor 1:11, and there is reason to suppose that they had not even alluded to it in the letter which they had sent to him asking advice. See 1Cor 7:1. Comp. the Introduction. The apostle 1Cor 5:1 reproves them for tolerating a species of licentiousness which was not tolerated even by the heathens; he reproves them 1Cor 5:2 for being puffed up with pride even while this scandal existed in their church; he ordered them forthwith to purify the church by removing the incestuous person, 1Cor 5:4,5 and exhorted them to preserve themselves from the influence which a single corrupt person might have, operating like leaven in a mass 1Cor 5:6,7. Then, lest they should mistake his meaning, and suppose that by commanding them not to keep company with licentious persons, 1Cor 5:9, he meant to say, that they should withdraw from all intercourse with the heathen, who were known to be idolaters and corrupt, he says that that former command was not designed to forbid all intercourse with them, 1Cor 5:9-12); but that he meant his injunction now to extend particularly to such as as were professed members of the church; that they were not to cut off all intercourse with society at large because it was corrupt; that if any man professed to be a Christian and yet was guilty of such practices, they were to disown him, 1Cor 5:11; that it was not his province, nor did he assume it, to judge the heathen world which was without the church, 1Cor 5:12; but that this was entirely consistent with the view that eh had a right to exercise discipline within the church, on such as professed to be Christians; and that therefore they were bound to put away that wicked person.

Verse 1. It is reported. Greek, It is heard. There is a rumour. That rumour had been brought to Paul, probably by the members of the family of Chloe, 1Cor 1:11.

Commonly. ολως. Everywhere. It is a matter of common fame. It is so public that it cannot be concealed; and so certain that it cannot be denied. This was an offence, he informs us, which even the heathen would not justify or tolerate; and, therefore, the report had spread not only in the churches, but even among the heathen, to the great scandal of religion. When a report obtains such a circulation, it is certainly time to investigate it, and to correct the evil.

That there is fornication. Acts 15:20. The word is here used to denote incest; for the apostle immediately explains the nature of the offence.

And such fornication, etc. An offence that is not tolerated or known among the heathen. This greatly aggravated the offence, that in a Christian church a crime should be tolerated among its members which even gross heathens would regard with abhorrence. That this offence was regarded with abhorrence by even the heathens has been abundantly proved by quotations from classic writers. See Weststein, Bloomfield, and Whitby. Cicero says of the offence, expressly, that "it was an incredible and unheard-of crime." Pro Cluen. 6, 6. When Paul says that it was not "so much as named among the Gentiles," he doubtless uses the word ονομαζεται in the sense of named with approbation, tolerated, or allowed. The crime was known in a few instances, but chiefly of those who were princes and rulers; but it was nowhere regarded with approbation, but was always treated as abominable wickedness. All that the connexion requires us to understand by the word "named" here is, that it was not tolerated or allowed; it was treated with abhorrence, and it was therefore more scandalous that it was allowed in a Christian church. Whitby supposes that this offence that was tolerated in the church at Corinth gave rise to the scandals that were circulated among the heathen respecting the early Christians, that they allowed of licentious intercourse among the members of their churches. This reproach was circulated extensively among the heathen, and the primitive Christians were at much pains to refute it.

That one should have. Probably as his wife; or it may mean simply that he had criminal intercourse with her. Perhaps some man had parted with his wife, on some account, and his Son had married her, or maintained her for criminal intercourse. It is evident from 2Cor 7:12, that the person who had suffered the wrong, as well as he who had done it, was still alive. Whether this was marriage or concubinage has been disputed by commentators, and it is not possible, perhaps, to determine. See the subject discussed in Bloomfield.

(*) "fornication" "impurity" (a) "one should" De 27:20 Verse 2. And ye are puffed up. 1Cor 4:18. You are filled with pride, and with a vain conceit of your own wisdom and purity, notwithstanding the existence of this enormous wickedness in your church. This does not mean that they were puffed up, or proud on account of the existence of this wickedness, but they were filled with pride notwithstanding, or in spite of it. They ought to have been a troubled people. They should have mourned; and should have given their first attention to the removal of the evil. But instead of this, they had given indulgence to proud feeling, and had become elated with a vain confidence in their spiritual purity. Men are always elated and proud when they have the least occasion for it.

And have not rather mourned, etc. Have not rather been so afflicted and troubled as to take the proper means for removing the offence. The word mourn here is taken in that large sense. Ye have not been so much afflicted--so troubled with the existence of this wickedness, as to take the proper measures to remove the offender. Acts of discipline in the church should always commence with mourning that there is occasion for it. It should not be anger, or pride, or revenge, or party feeling, which prompt to it. It should be deep grief that there is occasion for it; and tender compassion for the offender.

Might be taken away. By excommunication. He should not, while he continues in this state, be allowed to remain in your communion.

(b) "mourned" 2Cor 7:7 Verse 3. For I verily. But I, whatever it may cost me; however you may esteem my interference; and whatever personal ill-will may be the result towards me, have adjudged this case to be so flagrant as to demand the exercise of discipline; and since the church to whom it belongs have neglected it, I use the authority of an apostle, and of a spiritual father, in directing it to take place. This was not a formal sentence of excommunication; but it was the declared opinion of an apostle that such a sentence should be passed, and an injunction on the church to exercise this act of discipline.

As absent in body. Since I am not personally present with you, I express my opinion in this manner. I am absent in body from you, and cannot, therefore, take those steps in regard to it which I could were I present.

But present in spirit. My heart is with you; my feelings are with you; I have a deep and tender interest in the case; and I judge as if I were personally present. Many suppose that Paul by this refers to a power which was given to the apostles, though at a distance, to discern the real circumstances of a case by the gift of the Spirit. Comp. Col 2:5, 2Kgs 5:26, 6:12. (Whitby, Doddridge, etc.) But the phrase does not demand this interpretation. Paul meant, probably, that though he was absent, yet his mind and attention had been given to this subject; he felt as deeply as though he were present, and would act in the same way. He had, in some way, been fully apprized of all the circumstances of the case, and he felt it to be his duty to express his views on the subject.

Have judged already. Margin, Determined, κεκρικα. I have made up my mind; have decided, and do decide. That is, he had determined what ought to be done in the case. It was a case in which the course which ought to be pursued was plain, and on this point his mind was settled. What that course should be, he states immediately.

As though I were present. As though I had a personal knowledge of the whole affair, and were with you to advise. We may be certain that Paul had the fullest information as to this case; and that the circumstances were well known. Indeed, it was a case about the facts of which there could be no doubt. They were everywhere known, 1Cor 5:1, and there was no need, therefore, to attempt to establish them by formal proof.

(+) "verily" "truly" (1) "judged" "determined" Verse 4. In the name, etc. By the authority; or in the behalf; or acting by his commission or power, 2Cor 2:10. Acts 3:6. This does not refer to Paul alone in declaring his opinion, but means that they were to be assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus, and that they were to proceed to exercise discipline by his authority. The idea is, that the authority to administer discipline is derived from the Lord Jesus Christ, and is to be exercised in his name, and to promote his honour.

When ye are gathered together. Or, "You being assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus." This is to be connected with the previous words, and means,

(1.) that they were to be assembled for the purpose of administering discipline; and

(2.) that this was to be done in the name and by the authority of the Lord Jesus.

And my spirit. 1Cor 5:3. As if I were with you; that is, with my declared opinion; knowing what I would advise, were I one of you; or, I being virtually present with you by having delivered my opinion. It cannot mean that Paul's soul would be really present with them; but that, knowing his views and feelings, and what he would do, and knowing his love for them, they could act as if he were there. This passage proves that discipline belongs to the church itself; and so deep was Paul's conviction of this, that even he would not administer it without their concurrence and action. And if Paul would not do it, and in a case, too, where bodily pains were to be inflicted by miraculous agency, assuredly no other ministers have a right to assume the authority to administer discipline without the action and the concurrence of the church itself.

With the power, etc. This phrase is to be connected with the following verse. "I have determined what ought to be done. The sentence which I have passed is this: You are to be assembled in the name and authority of Christ. I shall be virtually present. And you are to deliver such a one to Satan, by the power of our Lord Jesus Christ." That is, it is to be done by you; and the miraculous power which will be evinced in the case will proceed from the Lord Jesus. The word power δυναμει is used commonly in the New Testament to denote some miraculous and extraordinary power; and here evidently means that the Lord Jesus would put forth such a power in the infliction of pain, and for the preservation of the purity of his church.

(d) "name of" 2Cor 2:9,10 (e) "power" Mt 16:19, Jn 20:23 Verse 5. To deliver. This is the sentence which is to be executed. You are to deliver him to Satan, etc.

Unto Satan. Beza, and the Latin Fathers, suppose that this is only an expression of excommunication. They say, that in the Scriptures there are but two kingdoms recognised--the kingdom of God, or the church, and the kingdom of the world, which is regarded as under the control of Satan; and that to exclude a man from one, is to subject him to the dominion of the other. There is some foundation for this opinion; and there can be no doubt that excommunication is here intended; and that, by excommunication, the offender was in some sense placed under the control of Satan. It is further evident, that it is here supposed that by being thus placed under him the offender would be subject to corporal inflictions by the agency of Satan, which are here called the "destruction of the flesh." Satan is elsewhere referred to as the author of bodily diseases. Thus in the case of Job, Job 2:7. A similar instance is mentioned in 1Timm 1:20, where Paul says he had delivered Hymeneus and Alexander "to Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme." It may be observed here, that though this was to be done by the concurrence of the church, as having a right to administer discipline, yet it was directed by apostolic authority; and there is no evidence that this was the usual form of excommunication, nor ought it now to be used. There was evidently miraculous power evinced in this case, and that power has long since ceased in the church.

For the destruction of the flesh. We may observe here,

(1.) that this does not mean that the man was to die under the infliction of the censure, for the object was to recover him; and it is evident that, whatever he suffered as the consequence of this, he survived it, and Paul again instructed the Corinthians to admit him to their fellowship, 2Cor 2:7.

(2.) It was designed to punish him for licentiousness of life---often called in the Scriptures one of the sins or works of the flesh, Gal 5:19 and the design was, that the punishment should follow in the line of the offence, or be a just retribution, as punishment often does. Many have supposed that, by the "destruction of the flesh," Paul meant only the destruction of his fleshly appetites or carnal affections; and that he supposed that this would be effected by the act of excommunication. But it is very evident from the Scriptures that the apostles were imbued with the power of inflicting diseases or bodily calamities for crimes. See Acts 13:11, 1Cor 11:30. What this bodily malady was, we have no means of knowing. It is evident that it was not of very long duration, since when the apostle exhorts them 2Cor 2:7 again to receive him, there is no mention made of his suffering then under it. This was an extraordinary and miraculous power. It was designed for the government of the church in its infancy, when everything was fitted to show the direct agency of God; and it ceased, doubtless, with the apostles. The church now has no such power. It cannot now work miracles; and all its discipline now is to be moral discipline, designed not to inflict bodily pain and penalties, but to work a moral reformation in the offender.

That the spirit may be saved. That his soul might be saved; that he might be corrected, humbled, and reformed by these sufferings, and recalled to the paths of piety and virtue. This expresses the true design of the discipline of the church; and it ought never to be inflicted but with a direct intention to benefit the offender, and to save the soul. Even when he is cut off and disowned, the design should not be vengeance, or punishment merely, but it should be to recover him and save him from ruin.

In the day of the Lord Jesus. The day of judgment, when the Lord Jesus shall come, and shall collect his people to himself.

(a) "deliver such a one" 1Timm 1:20 (b) "the spirit" 1Cor 11:32 Verse 6. Your glorying. Your boasting; or confidence in your present condition as if you were eminent in purity and piety.

Is not good. Is not well, proper, right. Boasting is never good; but it is especially wrong when, as here, there is an existing evil, that is likely to corrupt the whole church. When men are disposed to boast, they should at once make the inquiry whether there is not some sin indulged in, on account of which they should be humbled and subdued. If all individual Christians, and all Christian churches, and all men of every rank and condition, would look at things as they are, they would never find occasion for boasting. It is only when we are blind to the realities of the case, and overlook our faults, that we are disposed to boast. The reason why this was improper in Corinth, Paul states--that any sin would tend to corrupt the whole church, and that therefore they ought not to boast until that was removed.

A little leaven, etc. A small quantity of leaven or yeast will pervade the entire mass of flour, or dough, and diffuse itself through it all. This is evidently a proverbial saying. It occurs also in Gal 5:9. Comp. Mt 13:33. A similar figure occurs also in the Greek classic writers. By leaven the Hebrews metaphorically understood whatever had the power of corrupting, whether doctrine, or example, or anything else. Mt 16:6. The sense here is plain. A single sin indulged in, or allowed in the church, would act like leaven--it would pervade and corrupt the whole church, unless it was removed. On this ground, and for this reason, discipline should be administered, and the corrupt member should be removed.

The old leaven. The apostle here takes occasion, from the mention of leaven, to exhort the Corinthians to put away vice and sin. The figure is derived from the custom of the Jews in putting away leaven at the celebration of the passover. By the old leaven he means vice and sin; and also here the person who had committed the sin in their church. As the Jews, at the celebration of the passover, gave all diligence in removing leaven from their houses--searching every part of their dwellings with candles, that they might remove every particle of leavened bread from their habitations--so the apostle exhorts them to use all diligence to search out and remove all sin.

That ye may be a new lump. That you may be like a new mass of flour, or dough, before the leaven is put into it. That you may be pure and free from the corrupting principle.

As ye are unleavened. That is, as ye are bound by your Christian profession to be unleavened, or to be pure. Your very profession implies this, and you ought, therefore, to remove all impurity, and to become holy. Let there be no impurity, and no mixture inconsistent with that holiness which the gospel teaches and requires. The apostle here does not refer merely to the case of the incestuous person, but he takes occasion to exhort them to put away all sin. Not only to remove this occasion of offence, but to remove all impurity, that they might become entirely and only holy. The doctrine is, that Christians are by their profession holy, and that therefore they ought to give all diligence to remove everything that is impure.

For even Christ, etc. As the Jews, when their paschal lamb was slain, gave great diligence to put away all leaven from their dwellings, so we Christians, since our passover is slain, ought to give the like diligence to remove all that is impure and corrupting from our hearts. There can be no doubt here that the paschal lamb was a type of the Messiah; and as little that the leaven was understood to be emblematic of impurity and sin, and that their being required to put it away was intended to be an emblematic action designed to denote that all sin was to be removed and forsaken.

Our passover. Our paschal lamb, for so the word πασχα usually signifies. The sense is, "We Christians have a paschal lamb; and that lamb is the Messiah. And as the Jews, when their paschal lamb was slain, were required to put away all leaven from their dwellings, so we, when our paschal lamb is slain, should put away all sin from our hearts and from our churches." This passage proves that Paul meant to teach that Christ had taken the place of the paschal lamb--that that lamb was designed to adumbrate or typify him--and that consequently when he was offered, the paschal offering was designed to cease. Christ is often in the Scriptures compared to a lamb. See Isa 53:7, Jn 1:29; 1Pet 1:19, Rev 5:6,12.

Is sacrificed for us. Margin, Or slain--ετυθη. The word θυω may mean simply to slay or kill; but it is also used often in the sense of making a sacrifice as an expiation for sin, Acts 14:13,18, 1Cor 10:20. Comp. Gen 31:54, 46:1, Ex 3:18, 5:3,8,17; Ex 8:8,25-29, 13:15, 20:24, where it is used as the translation of the word , to sacrifice. It is used as the translation of this word no less than ninety-eight times in the Old Testament, and perhaps always in the sense of a sacrifice, or bloody offering. It is also used as the translation of the Hebrew word , and , to slay, to kill, etc., in Ex 12:21, 1Kgs 11:19, 2Chr 29:22, etc.; in all, in eleven places in the Old Testament. It is used in a similar sense in the New Testament, in Mt 22:4, Lk 15:23,27,30, Jn 10:10, Acts 10:13, 11:7. It occurs nowhere else in the New Testament than in the places which have been specified. The true sense of the word here is, therefore, to be found in the doctrine respecting the passover. That that was intended to be a sacrifice for sin is proved by the nature of the offering, and by the account which is everywhere given of it in the Old Testament. The paschal lamb was slain as a sacrifice. It was slain in the temple; its blood was poured out as an offering; it was sprinkled and offered by the priests in the same way as other sacrifices. See Ex 23:18, 34:25, 2Chr 30:15,16. And if so, then this passage means that Christ was offered as a sacrifice for sin--in accordance with the numerous passages of the New Testament, which speak of his death in this manner, Rom 3:25; and that his offering was designed to take the place of the paschal sacrifice, under the ancient economy.

For us. For us who are Christians. He died in our stead; and as the Jews, when celebrating their paschal feast, put away all leaven, so we, as Christians, should put away all evil from our hearts, since that sacrifice has now been made once for all.

(*) "Purge" "Cleanse" (e) "Christ" Isa 53:7, 1Pet 1:19, Rev 5:6,12 (1) "sacrificed" "slain" Verse 8. Let us keep the feast. Margin, Holy day--εορταζωμεν. This is language drawn from the paschal feast, and is used by Paul frequently to carry out and apply his illustration. It does not mean literally the paschal supper here--for that had ceased to be observed by Christians--nor the Lord's Supper particularly; but the sense is, "As the Jews when they celebrated the paschal supper, on the slaying and sacrifice of the paschal lamb, put away all leaven as emblematic of sin, so let us, in the slaying of our sacrifice, and in all the duties, institutions, and events consequent thereon, put away all wickedness from our hearts as individuals, and from our societies and churches. Let us engage in the service of God by putting away all evil."

Not with old leaven. Not under the influence, or in the indulgence of the feelings of corrupt and unrenewed human nature. The word leaven is very expressive of that former or old condition, and denotes the corrupt and corrupting passions of our nature before it is renewed.

The leaven of malice. Of unkindness and evil--which would diffuse itself, and invade the mass of Christians. The word malice--κακις--denotes evil in general,

And wickedness. Sin; evil. There is a particular reference here to the case of the incestuous person. Paul means that all wickedness should be put away from those who had been saved by the sacrifice of their passover, Christ; and, therefore, this sin in a special manner.

But with the unleavened bread, etc. That is, with sincerity and truth. Let us be sincere, and true, and faithful; as the Jews partook of bread unleavened, which was emblematic of purity, so let us be sincere and true. It is implied here that this could not be done unless they would put away the incestuous person. No Christians can have or give evidence of sincerity, who are not willing to put away all sin.

(1) "feast" "holyday" (a) "feast" Ex 13:6 (b) "leaven of malice" Mt 16:6,12 Verse 9. I wrote unto you. I have written. εγραψα. This word may either refer to this epistle, or to some former epistle. It simply denotes that he had written to them; but whether in the former part of this, or in some former epistle which is now lost, cannot be determined by the use of this word.

In an epistle, εντηεπιστολη. There has been considerable diversity of opinion in regard to this expression. A large number of commentators--as Chrysostom, Theodoret, Oecumenius, most of the Latin commentators, and nearly all the Dutch commentators--suppose that this refers to the same epistle, and that the apostle means to say that in the former part of this epistle 1Cor 5:2 he had given them this direction. And in support of this interpretation they say that τη, here, is used for ταυτη, and appeal to the kindred passages in Rom 16:2; Col 4:6, 1Thes 5:27, 2Thes 3:3,4. Many others--as Grotius, Doddridge, Rosenmuller, etc.--suppose it to refer to some other epistle which is now lost, and which had been sent to them before their messengers had reached him. This epistle might have been very brief, and might have contained little more than this direction. That this is the correct opinion, may appear from the following considerations, viz.:

(1.) It is the natural and obvious interpretation --one that would strike the great mass of men. It is just such an expression as Paul would have used on the supposition that he had written a previous epistle.

(2.) It is the very expression which he uses in 2Cor 7:8, where he is referring to this epistle as one which he had sent to them.

(3.) It is not true that Paul had in any former part of this epistle given this direction. He had commanded them to remove an incestuous person, and such a command might seem to imply that they ought not to keep company with such a person; but it was not a general command not to have intercourse with them.

(4.) It is altogether probable that Paul would write more letters than we have preserved. We have but fourteen of his remaining. Yet he laboured many years; founded many churches; and had frequent occasion to write to them.

(5.) We know that a number of books have been lost which were either inspired or which were regarded as of authority by inspired men. Thus the books of Jasher, of Iddo the seer, etc., are referred to in the Old Testament; and there is no improbability that similar instances may have occurred in regard to the writers of the New Testament.

(6.) In 1Cor 5:11, he expressly makes a distinction between the epistle which he was then writing and the former one. "But now," i.e., in this epistle, "I have written εγραψα to you," etc., an expression which he would not use if 1Cor 5:9 referred to the same epistle. These considerations seem to me to be unanswerable, and to prove that Paul had sent another epistle to them in which he had given this direction.

(7.) This opinion accords with that of a very large number of commentators. As an instance, Calvin says, "The epistle of which he here speaks is not now extant. Nor is it to be doubted that many others have perished; but it is sufficient that these survive to us which the Lord saw to be needful." If it be objected that this may affect the doctrine of the inspiration of the New Testament, since it is not to be supposed that God would suffer the writings of inspired men to be lost, we may reply,

(a.) that there is no evidence that these writings were inspired. Paul often makes a distinction in regard to his own words and doctrines, as inspired or uninspired, see 1Cor 7; and the same thing may have occurred in his writings.

(b.) This does not affect the inspiration of the books which remain, even on the supposition that those which were lost were inspired. It does not prove that these are not from God. If a man loses a guinea, it does not prove that those which he has not lost are counterfeit or worthless.

(c.) If inspired, they may have answered the purpose which was designed by their inspirations and then have been suffered to be lost--as all inspired books will be destroyed at the end of the world.

(d.) It is to be remembered that a large part of the discourses of the inspired apostles, and even the Saviour himself, Jn 21:25, have been lost. And why should it be deemed any more wonderful that inspired books should be lost, than inspired oral teaching? Why more wonderful that a brief letter of Paul should be destroyed, than that numerous discourses of Him "who spake as never man spake" should be lost to the world?

(e.) We should be thankful for the books that remain, and we may be assured that all the truth that is needful for our salvation has been preserved, and is in our hands. That any inspired books have been preserved amidst the efforts which have been made to destroy them all, is more a matter of wonder than that a few have been lost; and should rather lead us to gratitude that we have them, than to grief that a few, probably relating to local and comparatively unimportant matters, have been destroyed.

Not to company, etc. Not to associate with. See Eph 5:11; 2Thes 3:14. This, it seems, was a general direction on the subject. It referred to all who had this character. But the direction which he now 1Cor 5:11 proceeds to give, relates to a different matter --the proper degree of intercourse with those who were in the church.

(c) "epistle" Eph 5:11 (*) "fornicators" "The impure" Verse 10. Yet not altogether, etc. In my direction not "to company" with them, I did not mean that you should refuse all kinds of intercourse with them; that you should not treat them with civility, or be engaged with them in any of the transactions of life, or in the ordinary intercourse of society between man and man, for this would be impossible; but that you should not so associate with them as to be esteemed to belong to them, or so as to be corrupted by their example. You are not to make them companions and friends.

With the fornicators. Most heathen were of this description, and particularly at Corinth. See the Introduction to this epistle.

Of this world. Of those who are out of the church; or who are not professed Christians.

Or with the covetous. The avaricious; those greedy of gain. Probably his direction in the former epistle had been that they should avoid them.

Or extortioners. Rapacious persons; greedy of gain, and oppressing the poor, the needy, and the fatherless, to obtain money.

Or with idolaters. All the Corinthians before the gospel was preached there worshipped idols.

Then must ye needs, etc. It would be necessary to leave the world. The world is full of such persons. You meet them everywhere. You cannot avoid them in the ordinary transactions of life, unless you either destroy yourselves, or withdraw wholly from society. This passage shows,

(1.) that that society was full of the licentious and the covetous, of idolaters and extortioners. Rom 1:1.

(2.) That it is not right either to take our own lives to avoid them, or to withdraw from society and become monks; and, therefore, that the whole monastic system is contrary to Christianity. And,

(3.) that it is needful we should have some intercourse with the men of the world; and to have dealings with them as neighbours, and as members of the community. How far we are to have intercourse with them is not settled here. The general principles may be,

(1.) that it is only so far as is necessary for the purposes of good society, or to show kindness to them as neighbours and as members of the community.

(2.) We are to deal justly with them in all our transactions.

(3.) We may be connected with them in regard to the things which we have in common--as public improvements, the business of education, etc.

(4.) We are to endeavour to do them good, and for that purpose we are not to shun their society. But,

(5.) we are not to make them our companions; or to associate with them in their wickedness, or as idolaters, or covetous, or licentious; we are not to be known as partakers with them in these things. And for the same reason we are not to associate with the gay in their gaiety; with the proud in their pride; with the fashionable in their regard to fashion; with the friends of the theatre, the ball-room, or the splendid party, in their attachment to these amusements. In all these things we are to be separate; and are to be connected with them only in those things which we may have in common with them, and which are not inconsistent with the holy rules of the Christian religion.

(6.) We are not so to associate with them as to be corrupted by their example; or so as to be led by that example to neglect prayer and the sanctuary, and the deeds of charity, and the effort to do good to the souls of men. We are to make it a great point that our piety is not to suffer by that intercourse; and we are never to do anything, or conform to any custom, or to have any such intercourse with them as to lessen our growth in grace; divert our attention from the humble duties of religion; or mar our Christian enjoyment.

(*) "fornicators" "The impure" (+) "extortioners" "Oppressors" Verse 11. But now. In this epistle. This shows that he had written a former letter.

I have written unto you. Above. I have designed to give this injunction that you are to be entirely separated from one who is a professor of religion, and who is guilty of these things.

Not to keep company. To be wholly separated and withdrawn from such a person. Not to associate with him in any manner.

If any man that is called a brother. Any professing Christian; any member of the church.

Be a fornicator, etc. Like him who is mentioned, 1Cor 5:1.

Or an idolater. This must mean those persons who while they professed Christianity still attended the idol feasts, and worshipped there. Perhaps a few such may have been found who had adopted the Christian profession hypocritically.

Or a railer. A reproachful man; a man of coarse, harsh, and bitter words; a man whose characteristic it was to abuse others; to vilify their character, and wound their feelings. It is needless to say how much this is contrary to the spirit of Christianity, and to the example of the Master, "who when he was reviled, reviled not again."

Or a drunkard. Perhaps there might have been some then in the church, as there are now, who were addicted to this vice. It has been the source of incalculable evils to the church; and the apostle, therefore, solemnly enjoins on Christians to have no fellowship with a man who is intemperate.

With such an one no not to eat. To have no intercourse or fellowship with him of any kind; not to do anything that would seem to acknowledge him as a brother; with such an one not even to eat at the same table. A similar course is enjoined by John, 2Jn 1:10,11. This refers to the intercourse of common life, and not particularly to the communion. The true Christian was wholly to disown such a person, and not to do anything that would seem to imply that he regarded him as a Christian brother. It will be seen here that the rule was much more strict in regard to one who professed to be a Christian than to those who were known and acknowledged heathens. The reasons may have been:

(1.) The necessity of keeping the church pure, and of not doing anything that would seem to imply that Christians were the patrons and friends of the intemperate and the wicked.

(2.) In respect to the heathen, there could be no danger of its being supposed that Christians regarded them as brethren, or showed to them any more than the ordinary civilities of life; but in regard to those who professed to be Christians, but who were drunkards, or licentious, if a man was on terms of intimacy with them, it would seem as if he acknowledged them as brethren, and recognised them as Christians.

(3.) This entire separation and withdrawing from all communion was necessary in these times to save the church from scandal, and from the injurious reports which were circulated. The heathen accused Christians of all manner of crime and abominations. These reports were greatly injurious to the church. But it was evident that currency and plausibility would be given to them if it was known that Christians were on terms of intimacy and good fellowship with heathens and intemperate persons. Hence it became necessary to withdraw wholly from them; to withhold even the ordinary courtesies of life; and to draw a line of total and entire separation. Whether this rule in its utmost strictness is demanded now, since the nature of Christianity is known, and since religion cannot be in so much danger from such reports, may be made a question. I am inclined to the opinion that the ordinary civilities of life may be shown to such persons; though certainly nothing that would seem to recognise them as Christians. But as neighbours and relatives; as those who may be in distress and want, we are assuredly not for bidden to show towards them the offices of kindness and compassion. Whitby and some others, however, understand this of the communion of the Lord's Supper, and of that only.

(a) "if any man" Rom 16:17, 2Jn 1:10 (*) "fornicator" "impure" (+) "railer" "reviler" (+) "extortioner" "Oppressor" Verse 12. For what have I to do, etc. I have no authority over them; and can exercise no jurisdiction over them. All my rules, therefore, must have reference only to those who are within the church.

To judge. To pass sentence upon; to condemn; or to punish. As a Christian apostle, I have no jurisdiction over them.

Them also that are without. Without the pale of the Christian church; heathens; men of the world; those who did not profess to be Christians.

Do not ye judge, etc. Is not your jurisdiction as Christians confined to those who are within the church, and professed members of it? Ought you not to exercise discipline there, and inflict punishment on its unworthy members? Do you not in fact thus exercise discipline, and separate from your society unworthy persons-- and ought it not to be done in this instance, and in reference to the offender in your church?

(b) "without" Mk 4:11 Verse 13. But them, etc. They who are unconnected with the church are under the direct and peculiar government of God. They are, indeed sinners, and they deserve punishment for their crimes. But it is not ours to pronounce sentence upon them, or to inflict punishment. God will do that. Our province is in regard to the church. We are to judge these; and these alone. All others we are to leave entirely in the hands of God.

Therefore. Greek, And--και. "Since it is yours to judge the members of your own society, do you exercise discipline on the offender, and put him away."

Put away from among yourselves. Excommunicate him; expel him from your society. This is the utmost power which the church has; and this the church is bound to exercise on all those who have openly offended against the laws of Jesus Christ.

(1.) A public rumour with regard to the existence of an offence in the church should lead to discipline. This is due to the church itself, that it may be pure and uninjured; to the cause, that religion may not suffer by the offence; and to the individual, that he may have justice done him, and his character vindicated if he is unjustly accused; or that if guilty he may be reclaimed and reformed. Offences should not be allowed to grow until they become scandalous; but when they do, every consideration demands that the matter should be investigated, 1Cor 5:1.

(2.) Men are often filled with pride when they have least occasion for it, 1Cor 5:2. This is the case with individuals--who are often elated when their hearts are full of sin--when they are indulging in iniquity; and it is true of churches also, that they are most proud when the reins of discipline are relaxed, and their members are cold in the service of God, or when they are even living so as to bring scandal and disgrace on the gospel.

(3.) We see in what way the Christian church should proceed in administering discipline, 1Cor 5:2. It should not be with harshness, bitterness, revenge, or persecution. It should be with mourning that there is necessity for it; with tenderness toward the offender; with deep grief that the cause of religion has been injured; and with such grief at the existence of the offence as to lead them to prompt and decided measures to remove it.

(4.) The exercise of discipline belongs to the church itself, 1Cor 5:4. The church at Corinth was to be assembled with reference to this offence, and was to remove the offender. Even Paul, an apostle, and the spiritual father of the church, did not claim the authority to remove an offender except through the church. The church was to take up the case; to act on it; to pass the sentence; to excommunicate the man. There could scarcely be a stronger proof that the power of discipline is in the church, and is not to be exercised by any independent individual, or body of men, foreign to the church, or claiming an: independent right of discipline. If Paul would not presume to exercise such discipline independently of the church, assuredly no. minister, and no body of ministers, have any such right now. Either by themselves in a collective congregational capacity, or through their representatives in a body of elders, or in a committee appointed by them; every church is itself to originate and execute all the acts of Christian discipline over its members.

(5.) We see the object of Christian discipline, 1Cor 5:5. It is not revenge, hatred, malice, or the mere exercise of power that is to lead to it; it is the good of the individual that is to be pursued and sought. While the church endeavours to remain pure, its aim and object should be mainly to correct and reform the offender, that his spirit may be saved. When discipline is undertaken from any other motive than this; when it is pursued from private pique, or rivalship, or ambition, or the love of power; when it seeks to overthrow the influence or standing of another, it is wrong. The salvation of the offender and the glory of God should prompt to all the measures which should be taken in the case.

(6.) We see the danger of indulging in any sin--both in reference to ourselves as individuals, or to the church, 1Cor 5:6. The smallest sin indulged in will spread pollution through the whole body, as a little leaven will affect the largest mass.

(7.) Christians should be pure, 1Cor 5:7,8. Their Saviour, their paschal lamb, was pure; and he died that they might be pure. He gave himself that his people might be holy; and by all the purity of his character--by all the labours and self-denials of his life--by all his sufferings and groans in our behalf, are we called on to be holy.

(8.) We are here presented with directions in regard to our intercourse with those who are not members of the church, 1Cor 5:10. There is nothing that is more difficult to be understood than the duty of Christians respecting such intercourse. Christians often feel that they are in danger from it, and are disposed to withdraw almost entirely from the world. And they ask with deep solicitude often, what course they are to pursue? Where shall the line be drawn? How far shall they go? And where shall they deem the intercourse with the world unlawful or dangerous? A few remarks here as rules may aid us in answering these questions: 1st. Christians are not wholly to withdraw from intercourse with the people of this world. This was the error of the monastic system, and this error has been the occasion of innumerable corruptions and abominations in the papal church. They are not to do this, because

(a.) it is impossible. They must needs then, says Paul, go out of the world.

(b.) Because religion is not to be regarded as dissocial, and gloomy, and unkind.

(c.) Because they have many interests in common with those who are unconnected with the church, and they are not to abandon them. The interests of justice, and liberty, and science, and morals, and public improvements, and education, are all interests in which they share in common with others.

(d) Many of their best friends--a father, a mother, a son, a daughter--may be out of the church, and religion does not sever those ties, but binds them more tenderly and closely.

(e) Christians are inevitably connected in commercial dealings with those who are not members of the church; and to cease to have any connexion with them would be to destroy their own business, and to throw themselves out of employment, and to break up society.

(f) It would prevent the possibility of doing much good either to the bodies or the souls of men. The poor, the needy, and the afflicted, are, many of them, out of the church; and they have a claim on the friends of Christ, and on their active beneficence.

(g) It would break up and destroy the church altogether. Its numbers are to be increased and replenished from age to age by the efforts of Christians; and this demands that Christians should have some intercourse with the men of the world, whom they hope to benefit.

(h) An effort to withdraw wholly from the world injures religion. It conveys the impression that religion is morose, severe, misanthropic; and all such impressions do immense injury to the cause of God and truth.

2nd. The principles on which Christians should regulate their intercourse with the world, are these:

(a) They are not to be conformed to the world; they are not to do anything that shall countenance the views, feelings, principles of the world as such, or as distinguished from religion. They are not to do anything that would show that they approve of the peculiar fashions, amusements, opinions of the people of the world; or to leave the impression that they belong to the world.

(b) They are to do justice and righteousness to every man, whatever may be his rank, character, or views. They are not to do anything that will be calculated to give an unfavourable view of the religion which they profess to the men of the world.

(c) They are to discharge with fidelity all the duties of a father, husband, son, brother, friend, benefactor, or recipient of favours, towards those who are out of the church, or with whom they may be connected.

(d) They are to do good to all men--to the poor, the afflicted, the needy, the widow, the fatherless.

(e) They are to endeavour so to live and act, so to converse, and so to form their plans, as to promote the salvation of all others. They are to seek their spiritual welfare; and to endeavour by example and by conversation, by exhortation and by all the means in their power, to bring them to the knowledge of Christ. For this purpose they are kept on the earth instead of being removed to heaven; and to this object they should devote their lives.

(9.) We see from this chapter who are not to be regarded as Christians, whatever may be their professions, 1Cor 5:11. A man who is

(1) a fornicator, or

(2) COVETOUS, or

(3) an idolater, or

(4) a railer, or

(5) a drunkard, or

(6) an extortioner, is not to be owned as a Christian brother.

Paul has placed the covetous man, and the railer, and extortioners, in most undesirable company. They are ranked with fornicators and drunkards. And yet how many such persons there are in the Christian church--and many, too, who would regard it as a special insult to be ranked with a drunkard or an adulterer. But in the eye of God both are alike unfit for his kingdom, and are to be regarded as having no claims to the character of Christians.

(10.) God will judge the world, 1Cor 5:12,13. The world that is without the church--the mass of men that make no profession of piety--must give an account to God. They are travelling to his bar; and judgment in regard to them is taken into God's own hands, and he will pronounce their doom. It is a solemn thing to be judged by a holy God; and they who have no evidence that they are Christians should tremble at the prospect of being soon arraigned at his bar.

1 Corinthians 6

1st Corinthians CHAPTER 6

The main design of this chapter is to reprove the Corinthians for the practice of going to law before heathen courts or magistrates, instead of settling their differences among themselves. It seems that after their conversion they were still in the habit of carrying their causes before heathen tribunals, and this the apostle regarded as contrary to the genius and spirit of the Christian religion, and as tending to expose religion to contempt in the eyes of the men of the world. He, therefore, 1Cor 6:1-7, reproves this practice, and shows them that their differences should be settled among themselves. It seems also that the spirit of litigation and of covetousness had led them in some instances to practise fraud and oppression of each other; and he therefore takes occasion 1Cor 6:8-11 to show that this was wholly inconsistent with the hope of heaven and the nature of Christianity.

It would seem, also, that some at Corinth had not only indulged in these and kindred vices, but had actually defended them. This was done by plausible, but sophistical arguments, drawn from the strong passions of men; from the fact that the body was made for eating and drinking, etc. To these arguments the apostle replies in the close of the chapter, 1Cor 6:12-20, and especially considers the sin of fornication, to which they were particularly exposed in Corinth, and shows the heinousness of it, and its entire repugnance to the pure gospel of Christ.

Verse 1. Dare any of you. The reasons why the apostle introduced this subject here may have been,

(1.) that he had mentioned the subject of judging, 1Cor 5:13, and that naturally suggested the topic which is here introduced; and

(2.) this might have been a prevailing evil in the church of Corinth, and demanded correction. The word dare here implies that it was inconsistent with religion, and improper. "Can you do it; is it proper or right; or do you presume so far to violate all the principles of Christianity as to do it?"

Having a matter. A subject of litigation; or a suit. There may be differences between men in regard to property and right, in which there shall be no blame on either side. They may both be desirous of having it equitably and amicably adjusted. It is not a difference between men that is in itself wrong, but it is the spirit with which the difference is adhered to, and the unwillingness to have justice done, that is so often wrong.

Against another. Another member of the church. A Christian brother. The apostle here directs his reproof against the plaintiff, as having the choice of the tribunal before which he would bring the cause.

Before the unjust. The heathen tribunals; for the word unjust here evidently stands opposed to the saints. The apostle does not mean that they were always unjust in their decisions, or that equity could in no case be hoped from them, but that they were classed in that division of the world which was different from the saints, and is synonymous with unbelievers, as opposed to believers.

And not before the saints. Before Christians. Can you not settle your differences among yourselves as Christians, by leaving the cause to your brethren, as arbitrators, instead of going before heathen magistrates? The Jews would not allow any of their causes to be brought before the Gentile courts. Their rule was this: "He that tries a cause before the judges of the Gentiles, and before their tribunals, although their judgments are as the judgments of the Israelites, so this is an ungodly man," etc. Maimon. Hilch. Sanhedrim, chap. xxvi. 7. They even looked no such an action as bad as profaning the name of God.

(*) "unjust" "unrighteous" Verse 2. Do ye not know, etc. The object of this verse is evidently to show that Christians were qualified to determine controversies which might arise among themselves. This the apostle shows by reminding them that they shall be engaged in determining matters of much more moment than those which could arise among the members of a church on earth; and that if qualified for that, they must be regarded as qualified to express a judgment on the questions which might arise among their brethren in the churches.

The saints. Christians, for the word is evidently used in the same sense as in 1Cor 6:1. The apostle says that they knew this, or that this was so well established a doctrine that none could doubt it, It was to be admitted on all hands.

Shall judge the world. A great variety of interpretations has been given to this passage. Grotius supposes it means that they shall be first judged by Christ, and then act as assessors to him in the judgment, or join with him in condemning the wicked; and he appeals to Mt 19:28; Lk 22:30, where Christ says that they which have followed him should "sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." Mt 19:28. Whitby supposes that it means that Christians are to judge or condemn the world by their example, or that there shall be Christian magistrates, according to the prophecy of Isaiah, Isa 49:23, and Daniel, Dan 7:18. Rosenmuller supposes it means that Christians are to judge the errors and sins of men pertaining to religion, as in 1Cor 2:13,16; and that they ought to be able, therefore, to judge the smaller matters pertaining to this life. Bloomfield, and the Greek Fathers, and commentators, suppose that this means, that the saints will furnish matter to condemn the world; that is, by their lives and example they shall be the occasion of the greater condemnation of the world. But to this there are obvious objections.

(1.) It is an unusual meaning of the word judge.

(2.) It does not meet the case before us. The apostle is evidently saying that Christians will occupy so high and important a station in the work of judging the world, that they ought to be regarded as qualified to exercise judgment on the things pertaining to this life; but the fact that their holy lives shall be the occasion of the deeper condemnation of the world, does not seem to furnish any plain reason for this. To the opinion also of Whitby, Lightfoot, Vitringa, etc., that it refers to the fact that Christians would be magistrates, and governors, etc., according to the predictions of Isaiah and Daniel, there are obvious objections.

(1.) The judgment to which Paul in this verse refers is different from that pertaining to things of this life, 1Cor 6:3; but the judgment which Christian magistrates would exercise, as such, would relate to them.

(2.) It is not easy to see in this interpretation how, or in what Sense, the saints shall judge the angels, 1Cor 6:3. The common interpretation, that of Grotius, Beza, Calvin, Doddridge, etc., is that it refers to the future judgment, and that Christians will in that day be employed in some manner in judging the world. That this is the true interpretation is apparent, for the following reasons.

(1.) It is the obvious interpretation--that which will strike the great mass of men, and is likely, therefore, to be the true one.

(2.) It accords with the account in Mt 19:28, and Lk 22:30,

(3.) It is the only one which gives a fair interpretation to the declaration that the saints should judge angels, in 1Cor 6:3. If asked in what way this is to be done, it may be answered, that it may be meant simply that Christians shall be exalted to the right hand of the Judge, and shall encompass his throne; that they shall assent to and approve of his judgment; that they shall be elevated to a post of honour and favour, AS IF they were associated with him in the judgment. They shall then be regarded as his friends, and express their approbation, and that with a deep sense of its justice, of the condemnation of the wicked. Perhaps the idea is, not that they shall pronounce sentence, which will be done by the Lord Jesus, but that they shall then be qualified to see the justice of the condemnation which shall be passed on the wicked; they shall have a clear and distinct view of the case; they shall even see the propriety of their everlasting punishment, and shall not only approve it, but be qualified to enter into the subject, and to pronounce upon it intelligently. And the argument of the apostle is, that if they would be qualified to pronounce on the eternal doom of men and angels; if they had such views of justice and right, and such integrity as to form an opinion and express it in regard to the everlasting destiny of an immense host of immortal beings, assuredly they ought to be qualified to express their sense of the smaller transactions in this life, and pronounce an opinion between man and man.

Are ye unworthy. Are you disqualified.

The smallest matters. Matters of least consequence--matters of little moment, scarcely worth naming, compared with the great and important realities of eternity. The "smallest matters" here mean the causes, suits, and litigations relating to property, etc.

(a) "saints shall judge" Dan 7:22, Mt 19:28, Jude 1:14,15, Rev 20:4 (*) "matters" "causes" Verse 3. Shall judge angels. All the angels that shall be judged, good or bad. Probably the reference is to fallen angels, as there is no account that holy angels will then undergo a trial, The sense is, "Christians will be qualified to see the justice of even the sentence which is pronounced on fallen angels. They will be able so to embrace and comprehend the nature of law, and the interests of justice, as to see the propriety of their condemnation. And if they can so far enter into these important and eternal relations, assuredly they ought to be regarded as qualified to discern the nature of justice among men, and to settle the unimportant differences which may arise in the church." Or, perhaps, this may mean that the saints shall in the future world be raised to a rank m some respects more elevated than even the angels in heaven. (Prof. Stuart.) In what respects they will be thus elevated, if this is the true interpretation, can be only a matter of conjecture. It may be supposed that it will be because they have been favoured by being interested in the plan of salvation--a plan that has done so much to honour God; and that to have been thus saved by the immediate and painful intervention of the Son of God, will be a higher honour than all the privileges which beings can enjoy who are innocent themselves. Verse 4. Ye have judgments. Causes; controversies; suits.

Things pertaining to this life. Property, etc.

Set them to judge, etc. The verb translated set--καθιζετε may be either in the imperative mood, as in our translation, and then it will imply a command; or it may be regarded as in the indicative, and to be rendered interrogatively, "Do ye set or appoint them to judge who are of little repute for their wisdom and equity?" i.e., heathen magistrates. The latter is probably the correct rendering, as according to the former no good reason can be given why Paul should command them to select as judges those who had little repute for wisdom in the church. Had he designed this as a command, he would doubtless have directed them to choose their most aged, wise, and experienced men, instead of those "least esteemed." It is manifest, therefore, that this is to be read as a question'. "Since you are abundantly qualified yourselves to settle your own differences, do you employ the heathen magistrates, in whom the church can have little confidence for their integrity and justice? It is designed, therefore, as a severe reproof for what they had been accustomed to do; and an implied injunction that they should do it no more.

Who are least esteemed: εξουθενημενους. Who are contemned, or regarded as of no value or worth; in whose judgment and integrity you can have little or no confidence. According to the interpretation given above of the previous part of the verse, this refers to the heathen magistrates into men in whose virtue, piety, and qualifications for just judgment Christians could have little confidence; and whose judgment must be regarded as in fact of very little value, and as very little likely to be correct. That the heathen magistrates were in general very corrupt there can be no doubt. Many of them were men of abandoned character, of dissipated lives, men who were easily bribed, and men, therefore, in whose judgment Christians could repose little confidence. Paul reproves the Corinthians for going before them with their disputes when they could better settle them themselves. Others, however, who regard this whole passage as an instruction to Christians to appoint those to determine their controversies who were least esteemed, suppose that this refers to the lowest orders of judges among the Hebrews; to those who were least esteemed, or who were almost despised; and that Paul directs them to select even them in preference to the heathen magistrates. See Lightfoot. But the objection to this is obvious and insuperable. Paul would not have recommended this class of men to decide their causes, but would have recommended the selection of the most wise and virtuous among them. This is proved by 1Cor 6:5, where, in directing them to settle their matters among themselves, he asks whether there is not a "wise man" among them, clearly proving that he wished their difficulties adjusted, not by the most obscure and the least respected members of the church, but by the most wise and intelligent members.

In the church. By the church. That is, the heathen magistrates evince such a character as not to be worthy of the confidence of the church in settling matters of controversy. Verse 5. I speak to your shame. I declare that which is a reproach to you, that your matters of dispute are carried before heathen tribunals.

Is it so, etc. Can it be that in the Christian church--the church collected in refined and enlightened Corinth--there is not a single member so wise, intelligent, and prudent, that his brethren may have confidence in him, and refer their causes to him? Can this be the case in a church that boasts so much of its wisdom, and that prides itself so muck in the number and qualifications of its intelligent members?

(*) "judge" "Decide" Verse 6. But brother, etc. One Christian goes to law with another. This is designed as a reproof. This was wrong,

(1.) because they ought rather to take wrong and suffer themselves to be injured, 1Cor 6:7;

(2.) because they might have chosen some persons to settle the matter by arbitration, without a formal trial; and,

(3.) because the civil constitution would have allowed them to have settled all their differences without a lawsuit. Josephus says that the Romans (who were now masters of Corinth) permitted the Jews in foreign countries to decide private affairs, where nothing capital was in question, among themselves. And Dr. Lardner observes, that the Christians might have availed themselves of this permission to have settled their disputes in the same manner. Credibility, vol. i. p. 165. Verse 7. There is utterly a fault. There is altogether a fault; or, you are entirely wrong in this thing.

Because ye go to law, etc. That is, in the sense under discussion, or before heathen magistrates. This was the point under discussion, and the interpretation should be limited to this. Whatever may be the propriety or impropriety of going to law before Christian magistrates, yet the point which the apostle refers to was that of going to law before heathens. The passage, therefore, should not be interpreted as referring to all litigation, but only of that which was the subject of discussion. The apostle says that that was wholly wrong; that they ought by no means to go with their causes against their fellow Christians before heathen magistrates; that whoever had the right side of the question, and whatever might be the decision, the thing itself was unchristian and wrong; and that rather than dishonour religion by a trial or suit of this kind, they ought to be willing to take wrong, and to suffer any personal and private injustice. The argument is, that greater evil would be done to the cause of Christ by the fact of Christians appearing before a heathen tribunal with their disputes, than could result to either party from the injury done by the other. And this is probably always the case; so that although the apostle refers here to heathen tribunals, the same reasoning, on the principle, would apply to Christians carrying their causes into the courts at all.

Why do ye not rather take wrong? Why do you not suffer yourself to be injured, rather than to dishonour the cause of religion by your litigations? They should do this,

(1.) because religion requires its friends to be willing to suffer wrong patiently, Prov 22:22, Mt 5:39,40, Rom 12:17,19, 1Thes 5:15.

(2.) Because great injury results to the cause of religion from such trials. The private wrong which an individual would suffer, in perhaps all cases, would be a less evil on the whole than the public injury which is done to the cause of piety by the litigations and strifes of Christian brethren before a civil court.

(3.) The differences among Christians could be adjusted among themselves, by a reference to their brethren. In ninety-nine cases of a hundred, the decision would be more likely to be just and satisfactory to all parties from an amicable reference, than from the decisions of a civil court. In the very few cases where it would be otherwise, it would be better for the individual to suffer, than for the cause of religion to suffer. Christians ought to love the cause of their Master more than their own individual interest. They ought to be more afraid that the cause of Jesus Christ would be injured than that they should be a few pounds poorer from the conduct of others, or than that they should individually suffer in their character from the injustice of others.

To be defrauded? Receive injury; or suffer a loss of property. Grotius thinks that the word "take wrong" refers to personal insult; and the word "defrauded" refers to injury in property. Together, they are probably designed to refer to all kinds of injury and injustice. And the apostle means to say, that they had better submit to any kind of injustice than carry the cause against a Christian brother before a heathen tribunal. The doctrine here taught is, that Christians ought by no means to go to law with each other before a heathen tribunal; that they ought to be willing to suffer any injury from a Christian brother rather than do it. And by implication the same thing is taught in regard to the duty of all Christians, that they ought to suffer any injury to their persons and property rather than dishonour religion by litigations before civil magistrates. It may be asked, then, whether lawsuits are never proper; or whether courts of justice are never to be resorted to by Christians to secure their rights? To this question we may reply, that the discussion of Paul relates only to Christians, when both parties are Christians, and that it is designed to prohibit such an appeal to courts by them. If ever lawful for Christians to depart from this rule, or for Christians to appear before a civil tribunal, it is conceived that it can be only in circumstances like the following:

(1.) Where two or more Christians may have a difference, and where they know not what is right, and what the law is in a case. In such instances there may be a reference to a civil court to determine it-- to have what is called an amicable suit, to ascertain from the proper authority what the law is, and what is justice in the case.

(2.) When there are causes of difference between Christians and the men of the world. As the men of the world do not acknowledge the propriety of submitting the matter to the church, it may be proper for a Christian to carry the matter before a civil tribunal, Evidently, there is no other way, in such cases, of settling a cause; and this mode may be resorted to, not with a spirit of revenge, but with a spirit of love and kindness. Courts are instituted for the settlement of the rights of citizens, and men by becoming Christians do not alienate their rights as citizens. Even these cases, however, might commonly be adjusted by a reference to impartial men, better than by the slow, and expensive, and tedious, and often irritating process of carrying a cause through the courts.

(3.) Where a Christian is injured in his person, character, or property, he has a right to seek redress. Courts are instituted for the protection and defence of the innocent and the peaceable against the fraudulent, the wicked, and the violent. And a Christian owes it to his country, to his family, and to himself, that the man who has injured him should receive the proper punishment. The peace and welfare of the community demand it. If a man murders my wife or child, I owe it to the laws and to my Country, to justice and to God, to endeavour to have the law enforced. So if a man robs my property, or injures my character, I may owe it to others as well as to myself that the law in such a case should be executed, and the rights of others also be secured. But in all these cases a Christian should engage in such prosecutions, not with a desire of revenge, not with the love of litigation, but with the love of justice, and of God, and with a mild, tender, candid, and forgiving temper, with a real desire that the opponent may be benefited, and that all his rights also should be secured. Rom 13:1 and following.

(a) "take wrong" Prov 20:22, Mt 5:39,40, Rom 12:17,19, 1Thes 5:15 Verse 8. Nay, ye do wrong, etc. Instead of enduring wrong patiently and cheerfully, they were themselves guilty of injustice and fraud.

And that your brethren. Your fellow Christians. As if they had injured those of their own family--those to whom they ought to be attached by most tender ties. The offence in such cases is aggravated, not because it is in itself any worse to injure a Christian than another man, but because it shows a deeper depravity, when a man overcomes all the ties of kindness and love, and injures those who are near to him, than it does where no such ties exist. It is for this reason that parricide, infanticide, etc., are regarded everywhere as crimes of peculiar atrocity, because a child or a parent must have sundered all the tenderest cords of virtue before it could be done.

(a) "defraud" 1Thes 4:6 Verse 9. Know ye not", etc. The apostle introduces the declaration in this verse to show the evil of their course, and especially of the injustice which they did one to another, and their attempt to enforce and maintain the evil by an appeal to the heathen tribunals. He assures them, therefore, that the unjust could not be saved.

The unrighteous. The unjust αδικοι--such as he had just mentioned--they who did injustice to others, and attempted to do it under the sanction of the courts.

Shall not inherit. Shall not possess; shall not enter into. The kingdom of heaven is often represented as an inheritance, Mt 9:29; Mt 25:34, Mk 10:17, Lk 10:25, 18:18, 1Cor 15:50, Eph 1:11,14, 5:5.

The kingdom of God. Cannot be saved; cannot enter into heaven. Mt 3:2. This may refer either to the kingdom of God in heaven, or to the church on earth--most probably the former. But the sense is the same essentially, whichever is meant. The man who is not fit to enter into the one, is not fit to enter into the other. The man who is fit to enter the kingdom of God on earth, shall also enter into that in heaven.

Be not deceived. A most important direction to be given to all. It implies,

(1.) that they were in danger of being deceived.

(a) Their own hearts might have deceived them.

(b) They might be deceived by their false opinions on these subjects.

(c) They might be in danger of being deceived by their leaders, who perhaps held the opinion that some of the persons who practised these things could be saved.

(2.) It implies, that there was no necessity of their being deceived. They might know the truth. They might easily understand these matters. It might be plain to them that those who indulged in these things could not be saved.

(3.) It implies that it was of high importance that they should not be deceived. For

(a) the soul is of infinite value.

(b) To lose heaven--to be disappointed in regard to that, will be a tremendous loss.

(c) To inherit hell and its woes will be a tremendous curse. Oh, how anxious should all be that they be not deceived, and that while they hope for life, they do not sink down to everlasting death!

Neither fornicators. See Gal 5:19-21, Eph 5:4,5, Heb 12:14, 13:4. Rom 1:29.

Nor effeminate, μαλακοι. This word occurs in Mt 11:8, and Lk 7:25, where it is applied to clothing, and translated "soft raiment;" that is, the light, thin garments worn by the rich and great. It occurs nowhere else in the New Testament except here. Applied to morals, as it is here, it denotes those who give themselves up to a soft, luxurious, and indolent way of living; who make self-indulgence the grand object of life; who can endure no hardship, and practise no self-denial in the cause of duty and of God. The word is applied in the classic writers to the Cinaedi, the Pathics, or Catamites; those who are given up to wantonness and sensual pleasures, or who are kept to be prostituted to others. Diog. Laer. vii. 5, 4; Xenoph. Mem. iii. 7, 1; Ovid, Fast. iv. 342. The connexion here seems to demand such an interpretation, as it occurs in the description of vices of the same class--sensual and corrupt indulgences. It is well known that this vice was common among the Greeks--and particularly prevailed at Corinth.

Abusers of themselves with mankind. αρσενοκοιται. Paederastae, or Sodomites. Those who indulged in a vice that was common among all the heathen. Rom 1:27.

(b) "fornicators" Gal 5:19-21, Eph 5:4,5, Heb 12:14,18, 13:4, Rev 22:15 Verse 10. Nor covetous 1Cor 5:10. It is remarkable that the apostle always rank the covetous with the most abandoned classes of men.

Nor revilers. The same word, which, in 1Cor 5:11 is rendered railer. 1Cor 5:11.

Nor extortioners. 1Cor 5:11.

Shall inherit. Shall enter; shall be saved, 1Cor 6:9.

(*) "extortioners" "Oppressors" Verse 11. And such. Such drunkards, lascivious and covetous persons. This shows

(1) the exceeding grace of God, that could recover even such persons from sins so debasing and degrading.

(2.) It shows that we are not to despair of reclaiming the most abandoned and wretched men.

(3.) It is well for Christians to look back on what they once were. It will produce

(a) humility,

(b) gratitude,

(d) an earnest desire that others may be recovered and saved in like manner. Comp. Eph 2:1,2, 5:8, Col 3:7, Tit 3:3-6. The design of this is to remind them of what they were, and to show them that they were now under obligation to lead better lives--by all the mercy which God had shown in recovering them from sins so degrading, and from a condition so dreadful.

But ye are washed. Heb 10:22. Washing is an emblem of purifying. They had been made pure by the Spirit of God. They had been indeed baptized, and their baptism was an emblem of purifying; but the thing here particularly referred to is not baptism, but it is something that had been done by the Spirit of God, and must refer to his agency on the heart in cleansing them from these pollutions. Paul here uses three words--washed, sanctified, justified--to denote the various agencies of the Holy Spirit by which they had been recovered from sin. The first, that of washing, I understand of that work of the Spirit by which the process of purifying was commenced in the soul, and which was especially signified in baptism--the work of regeneration or conversion to God. By the agency of the Spirit, the defilement of these pollutions had been washed away or removed--as filth is removed by ablution. The agency of the Holy Ghost in regeneration is elsewhere represented by washing. Tit 3:5, "The washing of regeneration." Compare Heb 10:22.

Ye are sanctified. This denotes the progressive and advancing process of purifying which succeeds regeneration in the Christian. Regeneration is the commencement of it--its close is the perfect purity of the Christian in heaven. Jn 17:17. It does not mean that they were perfect--for the reasoning of the apostle shows that this was far from being the case with the Corinthians; but that the work was advancing, and that they were in fact under a process of sanctification.

But ye are justified. Your sins are pardoned, and you are accepted as righteous, and will be treated as such on account of the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ. Rom 1:17''; Rom 3:25, Rom 3:26; Rom 4:3. The apostle does not say that this was last in the order of time, but simply says that this was done to them. Men are justified when they believe, and when the work of sanctification commences in the soul

In the name of the Lord Jesus. That is, by the Lord Jesus; by his authority, appointment, influence. Acts 3:6. All this had been accomplished through the Lord Jesus; that is, in his name remission of sins had been proclaimed to them, Lk 24:47; and by his merits all these favours had been conferred on them.

And by the Spirit of our God. The Holy Spirit. All this had been accomplished by his agency on the heart. This verse brings in the whole subject of redemption, and states in a most emphatic manner the various stages by which a sinner is saved; and by this single passage a man may obtain all the essential knowledge of the plan of salvation. All is condensed here in few words.

(1.) He is by nature a miserable and polluted sinner--without merit, and without hope.

(2.) He is renewed by the Holy Ghost, and washed by baptism.

(3.) He is justified, pardoned, and accepted as righteous, through the merits of the Lord Jesus alone.

(4.) He is made holy--becomes sanctified--and more and more like God, and fit for heaven.

(5.) All this is done by the agency of the Holy Ghost.

(6.) The obligation thence results that he should lead a holy life, and forsake sin in every form.

(c) "such were" Eph 2:1,2, 5:8, Col 3:7, Tit 3:3-6 (d) "washed" Heb 10:22 (e) "sanctified" Heb 2:11 (f) "justified" Rom 8:30 Verse 12. All things are lawful unto me. The apostle here evidently makes a transition to another subject from that which he had been discussing--a consideration of the propriety of using certain things which had been esteemed lawful. The expression, "all things are lawful," is to be understood as used by those who palliated certain indulgences, or who vindicated the vices here referred to, and Paul designs to reply to them. His reply follows. He had been reproving them for their vices, and had specified several. It is not to be supposed that they would indulge in them without some show of defence; and the declaration here has much the appearance of a proverb, or a common saying--that all things were lawful; that is, "God has formed all things for our use, and there can be no evil if we use them." By the phrase "all things" here, perhaps, may be meant many things; or things in general; or there is nothing in itself unlawful. That there were many vicious persons who held this sentiment there can be no doubt; and though it cannot be supposed that there were any in the Christian church who would openly advocate it, yet the design of Paul was to cut up the plea altogether, wherever it might be urged, and to show that it was false and unfounded. The particular things which Paul here refers to, are those which have been called adiaphoristic, or indifferent; i.e., pertaining to certain meats and drinks, etc. With this Paul connects also the subject of fornication--the subject particularly under discussion. This was defended as "lawful," by many Greeks, and was practised at Corinth; and was the vice to which the Corinthian Christians were particularly exposed. Paul designed to meet all that could be said on this subject; and to show them that these indulgences could not be proper for Christians, and could not in any way be defended. We are not to understand Paul as admitting that fornication is in any case lawful; but he designs to show that the practice cannot possibly be defended in any way, or by any of the arguments which had been or could be used. For this purpose he observes,

(1.) that admitting that all things were lawful, there were many things which ought not to be indulged in;

(2.) that admitting that they were lawful, yet a man ought not to be under the power of any improper indulgence, and should abandon any habit when it had the mastery.

(3.) That fornication was positively wrong, and against the very nature and essence of Christianity, 1Cor 6:13-20.

Are not expedient. This is the first answer to the objection. Even should we admit that the practices under discussion are lawful, yet there are many things which are not expedient; that is, which do not profit, for so the word συμφερει properly signifies; they are injurious and hurtful. They might injure the body; produce scandal; lead others to offend or to sin. Such was the case with regard to the use of certain meats, and even with regard to the use of wine. Paul's rule on this subject is stated in 1Cor 8:13. That if these things did injury to others, he would abandon them for ever; even though they were in themselves lawful. 1Cor 8:1 and following, and Rom 14:14 and following. There are many customs which, perhaps, cannot be strictly proved to be unlawful or sinful, which yet do injury in some way if indulged in; and which, as their indulgence can do no good, should be abandoned. Anything that does evil--however small--and no good, should be abandoned at once.

All things are lawful. Admitting this; or even on the supposition that all things are in themselves right.

But I will not be brought under the power. I will not be subdued by it; I will not become the slave of it.

Of any. Of any custom, or habit, no matter what it is. This was Paul's rule; the rule of an independent mind. The principle was, that even admitting that certain things were in themselves right, yet his grand purpose was not to be the slave of habit, not to be subdued by any practice that might corrupt his mind, fetter his energies, or destroy his freedom as a man and as a Christian. We may observe,

(1.) that this is a good rule to act on. It was Paul's rule, 1Cor 9:27, and it will do as well for us as for him.

(2.) It is the true rule of an independent and noble mind. It requires a high order of virtue; and is the only way in which a man may be useful and active.

(3.) It may be applied to many things now. Many a Christian and Christian minister is a slave; and is completely under the power of some habit that destroys his usefulness and happiness. He is the SLAVE of indolence, or carelessness, or of some VILE HABIT--as the use of tobacco or of wine. He has not independence enough to break the cords that bind him; and the consequence is, that life is passed in indolence or in self-indulgence, and time, and strength, and property are wasted, and religion blighted, and souls ruined.

(4.) The man that has not courage and firmness enough to act on this rule should doubt his piety. If he is a voluntary slave to some idle and mischievous habit, how can he be a Christian? If he does not love his Saviour and the souls of men enough to break off from such habits which he knows are doing injury, how is he fit to be a minister of the self-denying Redeemer?

(a) "power" 1Cor 9:27 Verse 13. Meats for the belly, etc. This has every appearance of being an adage or proverb. Its meaning is plain. "God has made us with appetites for food, and he has made food adapted to such appetites; and it is right, therefore, to indulge in luxurious living." The word belly here, κοιλια denotes the stomach; and the argument is, that as God had created the natural appetite for food, and had created food, it was right to indulge in eating and drinking to any extent which the appetite demanded. The word meats here, βρωματα, does not denote animal food particularly, or flesh, but any kind of food. This was the sense of the English word formerly, Mt 3:4, 6:25, 9:10, 10:10, 14:9, etc.

But God shall destroy. This is the reply of Paul to the argument. This reply is, that as both are so soon to be destroyed, they were unworthy of the care which was bestowed on them, and that attention should be directed to better things. It is unworthy the immortal mind to spend its time and thought in making provision for the body which is soon to perish. And especially a man should be willing to abandon indulgences in these things when they tended to injure the mind, and to destroy the soul. It is unworthy a mind that is to live for ever, thus to be anxious about that which is so soon to be destroyed in the grave. We may observe here:

(1.) This is the great rule of the mass of the world. The pampering of the appetites is the great purpose for which they live, and the only purpose.

(2.) It is folly. The body will soon be in the grave; the soul in eternity. How low and grovelling is the passion which leads the immortal mind always to anxiety about what the body shall eat and drink!

(3.) Men should act from higher motives. They should be thankful for appetites for food; and that God provides for the wants of the body; and should eat to obtain strength to serve him, and to discharge the duties of life. Man often degrades himself below--far below--the brutes in this thing. They never pamper their appetites, or create artificial appetites. Man, in death, sinks to the same level; and all the record of his life is, that "he lived to eat and drink, and died as the brute dieth." How low is human nature fallen! How sunken is the condition of man!

Now the body is not, etc. "But δε the body is not designed for licentiousness, but to be devoted to the Lord." The remainder of this chapter is occupied with an argument against indulgence in licentiousness--a crime to which the Corinthians were particularly exposed. See the Introduction to this epistle. It cannot be supposed that any members of the church would indulge in this vice, or would vindicate it; but it was certain,

(1.) that it was the sin to which they were particularly exposed;

(2.) that they were in the midst of a people who did both practise and vindicate it. Comp. Rev 2:14,15. Hence the apostle furnished them with arguments against it, as well to guard them from temptation, as to enable them to meet those who did defend it, and also to settle the morality of the question on an immovable foundation. The first argument is here stated, that the body of man was designed by its Maker to be devoted to him, and should be consecrated to the purposes of a pure and holy life. We are, therefore, bound to devote our animal as well as our rational powers to the service of the Lord alone.

And the Lord for the body. "The Lord is, in an important sense, for the body; that is, he acts, and plans, and provides for it. He sustains and keeps it; and he is making provision for its immortal purity and happiness in heaven. It is not right, therefore, to take the body, which is nourished by the kind and constant agency of a holy God, and to devote it to purposes of pollution." That there is a reference in this phrase to the resurrection, is apparent from the following verse. And as God will exert his mighty power in raising up the body, and will make it glorious, it ought not to be prostituted to purposes of licentiousness.

(b) "belly" Mt 15:17,20, Rom 14:17 (c) "fornication" 1Thes 4:3,7 (d) "lord" Rom 12:1 (e) "Lord" Eph 5:23 Verse 14. And God hath both raised up, etc. This is the second argument against indulgences in this sin. It is this: "We are united to Christ. God has raised him from the dead, and made his body glorified. Our bodies will be like his, (comp. Php 3:21;) and since our body is to be raised up by the power of God; since it is to be perfectly pure and holy; and since this is to be done by his agency, it is wrong that it should be devoted to purposes of pollution and lust." It is unworthy

(1.) of our connexion with that pure Saviour who has been raised from the dead, the image of our resurrection from the death and defilements of sin, Rom 6:1 and following and

(2) unworthy of the hope that our bodies shall be raised up to perfect and immortal purity in the heavens. No argument could be stronger. A deep sense of our union with a pure and risen Saviour, and a lively hope of immortal purity, would do more than all other things to restrain from licentious indulgences.

(f) "God hath" Rom 6:5,8 Verses 15, 16. Know ye not, etc. This is the third argument against licentiousness. It is, that we, as Christians, are united to Christ, (comp. Jn 15:1, etc.;) and that it is abominable to take the members of Christ, and subject them to pollution and sin. Christ was pure, wholly pure. We are professedly united to him. We are bound therefore to be pure, as he was. Shall that which is a part, as it were, of the pure and holy Saviour, be prostituted to impure and unholy embraces?

God forbid. Rom 3:4. This expresses the deep abhorrence of the apostle at the thought. It needed not argument to show it. The whole world revolted at the idea; and language could scarcely express the abomination of the very thought.

Know ye not, etc. This is designed to confirm and strengthen what he had just said.

He which is joined. Who is attached to; or who is connected with.

Is one body. That is, is to be regarded as one; is closely and intimately united. Similar expressions occur in classic writers. See Grotius and Bloomfield.

For two, saith he, etc. This Paul illustrates by a reference to the formation of the marriage connexion in Gen 2:24. He cannot be understood as affirming that that passage had original reference to illicit connexions; but he uses it for purposes of illustration. God had declared that the man and his wife became one; in a similar sense, in unlawful connexions the parties became one.

(a) "members of Christ" Eph 5:30 Verse 16.

1Cor 6:15

(b) "for two" Gen 2:24, Mt 19:5 Verse 17. But he that is joined to the Lord. The true Christian, united by faith to the Lord Jesus. See Jn 15:1, seq.

Is one spirit. That is, in a sense similar to that in which a man and his wife are one body. It is not to be taken literally; but the sense is, that there is a close and intimate union; they are united in feeling, spirit, intention, disposition. The argument is beautiful. It is, "As the union of souls is more important than that of bodies; as that union is more lasting, dear, and enduring than any union of body with body can be; and as our union with him is with a Spirit pure and holy, it is improper that we should sunder that tie, and break that sacred bond, by being joined to a harlot. The union with Christ is more intimate, entire, and pure, than that can be between a man and woman; and that union should be regarded as sacred and inviolable." Oh, if all Christians felt and regarded this as they should, how would they shrink from the connexions which they often form on earth! Comp. Eph 4:4.

(c) "one spirit" Jn 17:21-23, Eph 4:4 Verse 18. Flee fornication. A solemn command of God--as explicit as any that thundered from Mount Sinai. None can disregard it with impunity--none can violate it without being exposed to the awful vengeance of the Almighty. There is force and emphasis in the word flee, φευγετε. Man should escape from it; he should not stay to reason about it--to debate the matter--or even to contend with his propensities, and to try the strength of his virtue. There are some sins which a man can resist; some about which he can reason without danger of pollution. But this is a sin where a man is safe only when he flies; free from pollution only when he refuses to entertain a thought of it; secure when he seeks a victory by flight, and a conquest by retreat. Let a man turn away from it without reflection on it, and he is safe. Let him think, and reason, and he may be ruined. "The very passage of an impure thought through the mind leaves pollution behind it." An argument on the subject often leaves pollution; a description ruins; and even the presentation of motives against it may often fix the mind with dangerous inclination on the crime. There is no way of avoiding the pollution but in the manner prescribed by Paul; there is no man safe who will not follow his direction. How many a young man would be saved from poverty, want, disease, curses, tears, and hell, could these TWO WORDS be made to blaze before him like the writing before the astonished eyes of Belshazzar, Dan 5 and could they terrify him from even the momentary contemplation of the crime.

Every sin, etc. This is to be taken comparatively. Sins in general; the common sins which men commit, do not immediately and directly affect the body, or waste its energies, and destroy life. Such is the case with falsehood, theft, malice, dishonesty, pride, ambition, etc. They do not immediately and directly impair the constitution, and waste its energies.

Is without the body. Does not immediately and directly affect the body. The more immediate effect is on the mind; but the sin under consideration produces an immediate and direct effect on the body itself.

Sinneth against his own body. This is the fourth argument against indulgence in this vice; and it is more striking and forcible. The sense is, "It wastes the bodily energies; produces feebleness, weakness, and disease; it impairs the strength, enervates the man, and shortens life." Were it proper, this might be proved to the satisfaction of every man by an examination of the effects of licentious indulgence. Those who wish to see the effects stated, may find them in Dr. Rush on the Diseases of the Mind. Perhaps no single sin has done so much to produce the most painful and dreadful diseases, to weaken the constitution, and to shorten life, as this. Other vices, as gluttony and drunkenness, do this also; and all sin has some effect in destroying the body; but it is true of this sin in an eminent degree.

(d) "Flee fornication" Prov 6:25-32, 7:24-27 Verse 19. What? know ye not, etc. This is the fifth argument against this sin. The Holy Ghost dwells in us; our bodies are his temples, and they should not be defiled and polluted by sin. 1Cor 3:16,17. As this Spirit is in us, and as it is given us by God, we ought not to dishonour the gift and the Giver by pollution and vice.

And ye are not your own. This is the sixth argument which Paul uses. We are purchased; we belong to God; we are his by redemption; by a precious price paid; and we are bound, therefore, to devote ourselves, body, soul, and spirit, as he directs, to the glory of his name, not to the gratification of the flesh. Rom 14:7,8.

(e) "your body" 2Cor 6:16 (f) "not your own" Rom 14:7,8 (*) "Holy Ghost" "Spirit" Verse 20. For ye are bought. Ye Christians are purchased; and by right of purchase should therefore be employed as he directs. This doctrine is often taught in the New Testament; and the argument is often urged, that therefore Christians should be devoted to God. 1Cor 7:23, 1Pet 1:18,19, 2:9, 2Pet 2:1, Rev 5:9. Acts 20:28.

With a price. τιμης. A price is that which is paid for an article, and which, in the view of the seller, is a fair compensation, or a valuable consideration why he should part with it; that is, the price paid is as valuable to him as the thing itself would be. It may not be the same thing either in quality or quantity, but it is that which to him is a sufficient consideration why he should part with his property. When an article is bought for a valuable consideration, it becomes wholly the property of the purchaser. He may keep it, direct it, dispose of it. Nothing else is to be allowed to control it without his consent. The language here is figurative. It does not mean that there was strictly a commercial transaction in the redemption of the church, a literal quid pro quo, for the thing spoken of pertains to moral government, and not to commerce. It means,

(1.) that Christians have been redeemed, or recovered to God.

(2.) That this has been done by a valuable consideration, or that which, in his view, was a full equivalent for the sufferings that they would have endured if their had suffered the penalty of the law.

(3.) That this valuable consideration was the blood of Jesus, as an stoning sacrifice, an offering, a ransom, which would accomplish the same great ends in maintaining the truth and honour of God, and the majesty of his law, as the eternal condemnation of the sinner would have done; and which, therefore, may be called, figuratively, the price which was paid. For if the same ends of justice could be accomplished by his atonement which would have been by the death of the sinner himself, then it was consistent for God to pardon him.

(4.) Nothing else could or would have done this. There was no price which the sinner could pay, no atonement which he could make; and, consequently, if Christ had not died, the sinner would have been the slave of sin, and the servant of the devil for ever.

(5.) As the Christian is thus purchased, ransomed, redeemed, he is bound to devote himself to God only, and to keep his commands, and to flee from a licentious life.

Glorify God. Honour God; live to him. Mt 5:16; Jn 12:28; Jn 17:1.

In your body, etc. Let your entire person be subservient to the glory of God. Live to him: let your life tend to his honour. No stronger arguments could be adduced for purity of life, and they are such as all Christians must feel.

(g) "bought" Acts 20:28, 1Pet 1:18,19, Rev 5:9 (h) "glorify God" 1Pet 2:9

========================================================================= REMARKS

(1.) We see from this chapter 1Cor 6:1-8 the evils of lawsuits, and of contentions among Christians. Every lawsuit between Christians is the means of greater or less dishonour to the cause of religion. The contention and strife; the time lost, and the money wasted; the hard feelings engendered, and bitter speeches caused; the ruffled temper, and the lasting animosities that are produced, always injure the cause of religion, and often injure it for years. Probably no lawsuit was ever engaged in by a Christian that did not do some injury to the cause of Christ. Perhaps no lawsuit was ever conducted between Christians that ever did any good to the cause of Christ.

(2.) A contentious spirit, a fondness for the agitation, the excitement, and the strife of courts, is inconsistent with the spirit of the gospel. Religion is retiring, peaceful, calm. It seeks the peace of all, and it never rejoices in contentions.

(3.) Christians should do nothing that will tend to injure the cause of religion in the eye of the world, 1Cor 6:7,8. How much better is it that I should lose a few pounds, than that my Saviour should lose his honour! How much better that my purse should be empty of glittering dust, even by the injustice of others, than that a single gem should be taken from his diadem! And how much better even that I should lose all, than that my hand should be reached out to pluck away one jewel, by my misconduct, from his crown! Can silver, can gold, can diamonds be compared in value to the honour of Christ and of his cause?

(4.) Christians should seldom go to law, even with others; never, if they can avoid it. Every other means should be tried first; and the law should be resorted to only when all else fails. How few lawsuits there would be if man had no bad passions! How seldom is the law applied to from the simple love of justice; how seldom from pure benevolence; how seldom for the glory of God! In nearly all cases that occur between men, a friendly reference to others would settle all the difficulty; always if there were a right spirit between the parties. Comparatively few suits at law will be approved of, when men come to die; and the man who has had the least to do with the law, will have the least, usually, to regret when he enters the eternal world.

(5.) Christians should be honest--strictly honest--always honest, 1Cor 6:8. They should do justice to all; they should defraud none. Few things occur that do more to disgrace religion than the suspicions of fraud, and overreaching, and deception, that often rest on professors of religion. How can a man be a Christian, and not be an honest man? Every man who is not strictly honest and honourable in his dealings should be regarded, whatever may be his pretensions, as an enemy of Christ and his cause.

(6.) The unholy cannot be saved, 1Cor 6:9,10. So God has determined; and this purpose cannot be evaded or escaped. It is fixed; and men may think of it as they please, still it is true that there are large classes of men who, if they continue such, cannot inherit the kingdom of God. The fornicator, the idolater, the drunkard, and the covetous, cannot enter heaven. So the Judge of all has said, and who can unsay it? So he has decreed, and who can change his fixed decree? And so it should be. What a place would heaven be, if the drunkard, and the adulterer, and the idolater were there! How impure and unholy would it be! How would it destroy all our hopes, dim all our prospects, mar all our joys, if we were told that they should sit down with the just in heaven! Is it not one of our fondest hopes that heaven will be pure, and that all its inhabitants shall be holy? And can God admit to his eternal embrace, and treat as his eternal friend, the man who is unholy; whose life is stained with abomination; who loves to corrupt others; and whose happiness is found in the sorrows, and the wretchedness, and vices of others? No; religion is pure, and heaven is pure; and whatever men may think, of one thing they may be assured, that the fornicator, and the drunkard, and the reviler, shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

(7.) If none of these can be saved as they are, what a host are travelling down to hell! How large a part of every community is made up of such persons! How vast is the number of drunkards that are known! How vast the host of extortioners, and of covetous men, and revilers of all that is good! How many curse their God and their fellow-men! How difficult to turn the corner of a street without hearing an oath! How necessary to guard against the frauds and deceptions of others! How many men and women are known to be impure in their lives! In all communities, how much does this sin abound! and how many shall be revealed at the great day as impure, who are now unsuspected I how many disclosed to the universe as all covered with pollution, who now boast even of purity, and who are received into the society of the virtuous and the lovely! Verily, the broad road to hell is thronged! And verily, the earth is pouring into hell a most dense and wretched population, and rolling down a tide of sin and misery that shall fill it with groans and gnashing of teeth for ever.

(8.) It is well for Christians to reflect on their former course of life, as contrasted with their present mercies, 1Cor 6:11. Such were they, and such they would still have been but for the mercy of God. Such as IS the victim of uncleanness and pollution, such as is the profane man and the reviler, such we should have been but for the mercy of God. That alone has saved us, and that only can keep us. How should we praise God for his mercy, and how are we bound to love and serve him for his amazing compassion in raising us from our deep pollution, and saving us from hell!

(9.) Christians should be pure, 1Cor 6:11-19. They should be above suspicion. They should avoid the appearance of evil. No Christian can be too pure; none can feel too much the obligation to be holy. By every sacred and tender consideration, God urges it on us; and by a reference to our own happiness, as well as to his own glory, he calls on us to be holy in our lives.

(10.) May we remember that we are not our own, 1Cor 6:20. We belong to God. We have been ransomed by sacred blood. By a reference to the value of that blood; by all its preciousness and worth; by all the sighs, and tears, and groans that bought us; by the agonies of the cross, and the bitter pains of the death of God's own Son, we are bound to live to God, and to him alone. When we are tempted to sin, let us think of the cross. When Satan spreads out his allurements, let us recall the remembrance of the sufferings of Calvary, and remember that all these sorrows were endured that we might be pure. Oh, how would sin appear were we beneath the cross, and did we feel the warm blood from the Saviour's open veins trickle upon us! Who would dare indulge in sin there? Who could do otherwise than devote himself, body and soul and spirit, unto God?

1 Corinthians 7

1st Corinthians CHAPTER VII, Introduction

THIS chapter commences the second part or division of this epistle, or, the discussion of those points which had been submitted to the apostle in a letter from the church at Corinth, for his instruction and advice. See the Introduction to the epistle. The letter in which they proposed the questions which are here discussed, has been lost. It is manifest that, if we now had it, it would throw some light on the answers which Paul has given to their inquiries in this chapter. The first question which is discussed, 1Cor 7:1-9, is, whether it were lawful and proper to enter into the marriage relation. How this question had arisen, it is not now possible to determine with certainty. It is probable, however, that it arose from disputes be- tween those of Jewish extraction, who held not only the lawfulness, but the importance of the marriage relation, according to the doctrines of the Old Testament, and certain followers or friends of some Greek philosophers, who might have been the advocates of celibacy. But why they advocated that doctrine is unknown. It is known, however, that many even of the Greek philosophers, among whom were Lycurgus, Thales, Antiphanes, and Socrates, (see Grotius,) thought that, considering "the untractable tempers of women, and how troublesome and fraught with danger was the education of children," it was the part of wisdom not to enter into the marriage relation. From them may have been derived the doctrine of celibacy in the Christian church; a doctrine that has been the cause of so much corruption in the monastic system, and in the celibacy of the clergy among the papists. The Jews, however, everywhere defended the propriety and duty of marriage. They regarded it as an ordinance of God. And to this day they hold that a man who has arrived at the age of twenty years, and who has not entered into this relation, unless prevented by natural defects, or by profound study of the law, sins against God. Between these two classes, or those in the church who had been introduced there from these two classes, the question would be agitated whether marriage was lawful and advisable.

Another question which, it seems, had arisen among: them was, whether it was proper to continue in the married state in the existing condition of the church, as exposed to trials and persecutions; or whether it was proper for those who had become converted to continue their relations in life with those who were unconverted. This the apostle discusses in 1Cor 7:10-24. Probably many supposed that it was unlawful to live with those who were not Christians; and they thence inferred that the relation which subsisted before conversion should be dissolved. And this doctrine they carried to the relation between master and servant, as well as between husband and wife. The general doctrine which Paul states in answer to this is, that the wife was not to depart from her husband, 1Cor 7:10; but if she did, she was not at liberty to marry again, since her former marriage was still binding, 1Cor 7:11. He added that a believing man, or Christian, should not put away his unbelieving wife, 1Cor 7:12, and that the relation should continue, notwithstanding a difference of religion; and that if a separation ensued, it should be in a peaceful manner, and the parties were not at liberty to marry again, 1Cor 7:13-17. So, also, in regard to the relation of master and slave. It was not to be violently sundered. The relations of life were not to be broken up by Christianity; but every man was to remain in that rank of life in which he was when he was converted, unless it could be changed in a peaceful and lawful manner, 1Cor 7:18-24.

A third subject submitted to him was, whether it was advisable, in existing circumstances, that the unmarried virgins who were members of the church should enter into the marriage relation, 1Cor 7:25-40. This the apostle answers in the remainder of the chapter. The sum of his advice on that question is, that it would be lawful for them to marry, but that it was not then advisable; and that, at all events, they should so act as to remember that life was short, and so as not to be too much engrossed with the affairs of this life, but should live for eternity. He said that though it was lawful, yet,

(1.) in their present distress it might be unadvisable, 1Cor 7:26.

(2.) That marriage tended to an increase of care and anxiety, and it might not be proper then to enter into that relation, 1Cor 7:32-35.

(3.) That they should live to God, 1Cor 7:29-31.

(4.) That a man should not be oppressive and harsh towards his daughter, or towards one under his care; but that, if it would be severe in him to forbid such a marriage, he should allow it, 1Cor 7:36. And

(5.) that on the whole it was advisable, under existing circumstances, not to enter into the marriage relation, 1Cor 7:38-40.

Verse 1. Now concerning, etc. In reply to your inquiries. The first, it seems, was in regard to the propriety of marriage; that is, whether it was lawful and expedient.

It is good. It is well. It is fit, convenient; or, it is suited to the present circumstances; or, the thing itself is well and expedient in certain circumstances. The apostle did not mean that marriage was unlawful, for he says, Heb 13:4, that "marriage is honourable in all." But he here admits, with one of the parties in Corinth, that it was well and proper, in some circumstances, not to enter into the marriage relation. See @1Co 7:7,8,26,28,31,32.

Not to touch a woman. Not to be connected with her by marriage. Xenophon, (Cyro., b. 1,) uses the same word (απτω, to touch) to denote marriage. Compare Gen 20:4,6, 26:11, Prov 6:29.

(*) "to touch" "Not to take a wife" Verse 2. Nevertheless. But, (δε.) Though this is to be admitted as proper where it can be done, when a man has entire control of himself and his passions, and though in present circumstances it would be expedient, yet it may be proper also to enter into the marriage connexion.

To avoid fornication. Greek, On account of (δια) fornication. The word fornication is used here in the large sense of licentiousness in general. For the sake of the purity of society, and to avoid the evils of sensual indulgence, and the corruptions and crimes which attend an illicit intercourse, it is proper that the married state should be entered. To this vice they were particularly exposed in Corinth. See the Introduction. Paul would keep the church from scandal. How much evil, how much deep pollution, how many abominable crimes would have been avoided, which have since grown out of the monastic system, and the celibacy of the clergy among the papists, if Paul's advice had been followed by all professed Christians! Paul says that marriage is honourable, and that the relations of domestic life should be formed, to avoid the evils which would otherwise result. The world is the witness of the evils which flow from the neglect of his advice. Every community where the marriage tie has been lax and feeble, or where it has been disregarded or dishonoured, has been full of pollution, and it ever will be. Society is pure and virtuous, just as marriage is deemed honourable, and as its vows are adhered to and preserved.

Let every man, etc. Let the marriage vow be honoured by all.

Have his own wife. And one wife, to whom he shall be faithful. Polygamy is unlawful under the gospel; and divorce is unlawful. Let every man and woman, therefore, honour the institution of God, and avoid the evils of illicit indulgence. Verse 3. Let the husband, etc. "Let them not imagine that there is any virtue in living separate from each other, as if they were in a state of celibacy."--Doddridge. They are bound to each other; in every way they are to evince kindness, and to seek to promote the happiness and purity of each other. There is a great deal of delicacy used here by Paul, and his expression is removed as far as possible from the grossness of heathen writers. His meaning is plain; but instead of using a word to express it which would be indelicate and offensive, he uses one which is not indelicate in the slightest degree, The word which he uses (ευνοιαν, benevolence) denotes kindness, good-will, affection of mind. And by the use of the word "due," (οφειλομενην,) he reminds them of the sacredness of their vow, and of the fact that in person, property, and in every respect, they belong to each other. It was necessary to give this direction, for the contrary might have been regarded as proper by many, who would have supposed there was special virtue and merit in living separate from each other; -- as facts have shown that many have imbibed such an idea;--and it was not possible to give the rule with more delicacy than Paul has done. Many Mss., however, instead of "due benevolence," read οφειλην, a debt, or that which is owed; and this reading has been adopted by Griesbach in the text. Homer, with a delicacy not unlike the apostle Paul, uses the word φιλοτητα, friendship, to express the same idea.

(a) "husband" Ex 21:10, 1Pet 3:7 (+) "benevolence" "What is due to the wife" Verse 4. The wife hath not power, etc. By the marriage covenant that power, in this respect, is transferred to the husband.

And likewise also the husband. The equal rights of husband and wife, in the Scriptures, are everywhere maintained. They are to regard themselves as united in the most intimate union, and in the most tender ties. Verse 5. Defraud ye not, etc. Of the right mentioned above. Withdraw not from the society of each other.

Except it be with consent. With a mutual understanding, that you may engage in the extraordinary duties of religion. Comp. Ex 19:15.

And come together again, etc. Even by mutual consent, the apostle would not have this separation to be perpetual; since it would expose them to many of the evils which the marriage relation was designed to avoid.

That Satan, etc. That Satan take not advantage of you, and throw you into temptation, and fill you with thoughts and passions which the marriage compact was designed to remedy.

(b) "with consent" Joel 2:16 (c) "Satan" 1Thes 3:5 Verse 6. But I speak this by permission, etc. It is not quite certain whether the word "this," (τουτο) in this verse, refers to what precedes, or to what follows. On this commentators are divided, the more natural and obvious interpretation would be to refer it to the preceding statement. I am inclined to think that the more natural construction is the true one, and that Paul refers to what he had said in 1Cor 7:5. Most recent commentators, as Macknight and Rosenmuller, however, suppose it refers to what follows, and appeal to similar places in Joel 1:2, Ps 49:2; 1Cor 10:23. Calvin supposes it refers to what was said in 1Cor 7:1

By permission. συγγνωμην. This word means indulgence, or permission, and stands opposed to that which is expressly enjoined. Comp. 1Cor 7:25: "I am allowed to say this; I have no express command on the subject; I give it as my opinion; I do not speak it directly under the influence of Divine inspiration." See 1Cor 7:10,25,40. Paul here does not claim to be under inspiration in these directions which he specifies. But this is no argument against his inspiration in general, but rather the contrary. For,

(1.) it shows that he was an honest man, and was disposed to state the exact truth. An impostor, pretending to inspiration, would have claimed to have been always inspired. Who ever heard of a pretender to Divine inspiration admitting that in anything he was not under Divine guidance? Did Mohammed ever do this? Do impostors now ever do it?

(2.) It shows that in other cases, where no exception is made, he claimed to be inspired. These few exceptions, which he expressly makes, prove that in everywhere else he claimed to be under the influence of inspiration.

(3.) We are to suppose, therefore, that in all his writings where he makes no express exceptions, (and the exceptions are very few in number,) Paul claimed to be inspired. Macknight, however, and some others, understand this as mere advice, as an inspired man, though not as a command.

Not of commandment. Not by express instruction from the Lord. See 1Cor 7:25. I do not claim in this to be under the influence of inspiration; and supposed that it was unlawful for a Christian wife or husband to be my counsel here may be regarded, or not, as you may be able able to receive it. Verse 7. For I would, etc. I would prefer.

That all men, etc. That Paul was unmarried is evident from 1Cor 9:5. But he does not refer to this fact here. When he wishes that all men were like himself, he evidently does not intend that he would prefer that all should be unmarried, for this would be against the Divine institution, and against his own precepts elsewhere. But he would be glad if all men had control over their passions and propensities as he had; had the gift of continence, and could abstain from marriage when circumstances of trial, etc., would make it proper. We may add, that when Paul wishes to exhort to anything that is difficult, he usually adduces his own example to show that it may be done; an example which it would be well for all ministers to be able to follow.

But every man hath his proper gift. Every man has his own peculiar talent, or excellence. One man excels in one thing, and another in another. One may not have this particular virtue, but he may be distinguished for another virtue quite as valuable. The doctrine here is, therefore, that we are not to judge of others by ourselves, or measure their virtue by ours. We may excel in some one thing, they in another. And because they have not our peculiar virtue, or capability, we are not to condemn or denounce them. Comp. Mt 19:11,12.

Of God. Bestowed by God, either in the original endowments and faculties of body or mind, or by his grace. In either case it is the gift of God. The virtue of continence is his gift as well as any other; and Paul had reason, as any other man must have, to be thankful that God had conferred it on him. So if a man is naturally amiable, kind, gentle, large-hearted, tender, and affectionate, he should regard it as the gift of God, and be thankful that he has not to contend with the evils of a morose, proud, haughty, and severe temper. It is true, however, that all these virtues may be greatly strengthened by discipline, and that religion gives rigour and comeliness to them all. Paul's virtue in this was strengthened by his resolution; by his manner of life; by his frequent fastings and trials, and by the abundant employment which God gave him in the apostleship. And it is true still, that if a man is desirous to overcome the lusts of the flesh, industry, and hardship, and trial, and self-denial will enable him, by the grace of God, to do it. Idleness is the cause of no small part of the corrupt desires of men; and God kept Paul from these, (1.) by giving him enough to do; and, (2.) by giving him enough to suffer.

(a) "every man" Mt 19:11,12 Verse 8. To the unmarried. The word unmarried (αγαμοις) may refer either to those who had never been married, or to widowers. It here means simply those who were at that time unmarried, and his reasoning applies to both classes.

And widows. The apostle specifies these, though he had not specified widowers particularly. The reason of this distinction seems to be, that he considers more particularly the case of those females who had never been married, in the close of the chapter, 1Cor 7:25.

It is good for them. It may be advisable, in the present circumstances of persecution and distress, not to be encumbered with the cares and anxieties of a family. 1Cor 7:26,32-34.

If they abide. That they remain, in the present circumstances, unmarried. See 1Cor 7:26.

(*) "unmarried and widows" "Or to widowers" Verse 9. But if they cannot contain. If they have not the gift of continence; if they cannot be secure against temptation; if they have not strength of virtue enough to preserve them from the danger of sin, and of bringing reproach and scandal on the church.

It is better. It is to be preferred.

Than to burn. The passion here referred to is often compared to a fire. See Virg. AEn. iv. 68. It is better to marry, even with all the inconveniences attending the marriage life in a time of distress and persecution in the church, 1Cor 7:26, than to be the prey of raging, consuming, and exciting passions.

(+) "contain" "have not continence" (b) "let them marry" 1Timm 5:14 Verse 10. And unto the married. This verse commences the second subject of inquiry; to wit, whether it was proper, in the existing state of things, for those who were married to continue this relation, or whether they ought to separate. The reasons why any may have supposed that it was best to separate, may have been,

(1.) that their troubles and persecutions might be such that they might judge it best that families should be broken up; and,

(2.) probably many supposed that it was unlawful for a Christian wife or husband to be connected at all with a heathen and idolator.

I command, yet not I, but the Lord. Not I so much as the Lord. This injunction is not to be understood as advice merely, but as a solemn divine command, from which you are not at liberty to depart. Paul here professes to utter the language of inspiration, and demands obedience. The express command of "the Lord" to which he refers, is probably the precept recorded in Mt 5:32, 19:3-10. These precepts of Christ asserted that the marriage tie was sacred and inviolable.

Let not the wife depart, etc. Let her not prove faithless to her marriage vows; let her not, on any pretence, desert her husband. Though she is a Christian, and he is not, yet let her not seek, on that account, to be separate from him. The law of Moses did not permit a wife to divorce herself from her husband, though it was sometimes done, (comp. Mk 10:12; but the Greek and Roman laws allowed it.--Grotius. But Paul here refers to a formal and legal separation before the magistrates, and not to a voluntary separation, without intending to be formally divorced. The reasons for this opinion are,

(1.) that such divorces were known and practised among both Jews and heathens.

(2.) It was important to settle the question whether they were to be allowed in the Christian church.

(3.) The claim would be set up, probably, that it might be done.

(4.) The question whether a voluntary separation might not be proper, where one party was a Christian and the other not, he discusses in the following verses, 1Cor 7:12-17. Here, therefore, he solemnly repeats the law of Christ, that divorce, under the Christian economy, was not to be in the power either of the husband or wife.

(c) "Let not the wife" Mal 2:14-16, Mt 19:6,9 Verse 11. But and if she depart. If she have withdrawn by a rash and foolish act; if she has attempted to dissolve the marriage vow, she is to remain unmarried, or be reconciled. She is not at liberty to marry another. This may refer, I suppose, to instances where wives, ignorant of the rule of Christ, and supposing that they had a right to separate themselves from their husbands, had rashly left them, and had supposed that the marriage contract was dissolved. Paul tells them that this was impossible; and that if they had so separated from their husbands, the pure laws of Christianity did not recognise this right, and they must either be reconciled to their husbands or remain alone. The marriage tie was so sacred that it could not be dissolved by the will of either party.

Let her remain unmarried. That is, let her not marry another.

Or be reconciled to her husband. Let this be done, if possible. If it cannot be, let her remain unmarried. It was a duty to be reconciled, if it was possible. If not, she should not violate her vows to her husband so far as to marry another. It is evident that this rule is still binding, and that no one who has separated from her husband, whatever be the cause, unless there be a regular divorce, according to the law of Christ, (Mt 5:32,) can be at liberty to marry again.

And let not the husband. Mt 5:32. This right, granted under the Jewish law, and practised among all the heathen, was to be taken away wholly under the gospel. The marriage tie was to be regarded as sacred; and the tyranny of man over woman was to cease; Verse 12. But to the rest. "I have spoken in regard to the duties of the unmarried, and the question whether it is right and advisable that they should marry, 1Cor 7:1-9. I have also uttered the command of the Lord in regard to those who are married, and the question whether separation and divorce were proper. Now in regard to the rest of the persons and cases referred to, I will deliver my opinion." The rest, or remainder, here referred to, relates particularly to the cases in which one party was a Christian, and the other not. In the previous verses he had delivered the solemn, explicit law of Christ, that divorce was to take place on neither side, and in no instance, except agreeably to the law of Christ, Mt 5:32. That was settled by Divine authority. In the subsequent verses he discusses a different question; whether a voluntary separation was not advisable and proper when the one party was a Christian and the other not, The word rest refers to these instances, and the questions which would arise under this inquiry.

Not the Lord. 1Cor 7:6. "I do not claim, in this advice, to be under the influence of inspiration; I have no express command on the subject from the Lord; but I deliver my opinion as a servant of the Lord; 1Cor 7:40, and as having a right to offer advice, even when I have no express command from God, to a church which I have founded, and which has consulted me on the subject." This was a case in which both he and they were to follow the principles of Christian prudence and propriety, when there was no express commandment. Many such cases may occur. But few, perhaps none, can occur in which some Christian principle shall not be found, that will be sufficient to direct the anxious inquirer after truth and duty.

If any brother. Any Christian.

That believeth not. That is not a Christian; that is a heathen.

And if she be pleased. If it seems best to her; if she consents; approves of living together still. There might be many cases where the wife or the husband, that was not a Christian, would be so opposed to Christianity, and so violent in their opposition, that they would not be willing to live with a Christian. When this was the case, the Christian husband or wife could not prevent the separation. When this was not the case, they were not to seek a separation themselves.

To dwell with him. To remain in connexion with him as his wife, though they differed on the subject of religion.

Let him not put her away. Though she is a heathen, though opposed to his religion, yet the marriage vow is sacred and inviolable. It is not to be sundered by any change which can take place in the opinions of either party. It is evident, that if a man were at liberty to dissolve the marriage tie, or to discard his wife when his own opinions were changed on the subject of religion, that it would at once destroy all the sacredness of the marriage union, and render it a nullity. Even, therefore, when there is a difference of opinion on the vital subject of religion, the tie is not dissolved; but the only effect of religion should be, to make the converted husband or wife more tender, kind, affectionate, and faithful, than they were before; and all the more so, as their partners are without the hopes of the gospel, and as they may be won to love the Saviour, 1Cor 7:16.

(d) "not the Lord" Ezr 10:11, etc. Verse 13. Let her not leave him. A change of phraseology from the last verse, to suit the circumstances. The wife had not power to put away the husband, and expel him from his own home; but she might think it her duty to be separated from him. The apostle counsels her not to do this; and this advice should still be followed. She should still love her husband, and seek his welfare; she should be still a kind, affectionate, and faithful wife; and all the more so, that she may show him the excellence of religion, and win him to love it. She should even bear much, and bear it long; nor should she leave him unless her life is rendered miserable, or in danger; or unless he wholly neglects to make provision for her, and leaves her to suffering, to want, and to tears. In such a case, no precept of religion forbids her to return to her father's house, or to seek a place of safety and of comfort. But even then it is not to be a separation on account of a difference of religious sentiment, but for brutal treatment. Even then the marriage tie is not dissolved, and neither party are at liberty to marry again.

(*) "him" "not put him away" Verse 14. For the unbelieving husband. The husband that is not a Christian; who still remains a heathen, or an impenitent man. The apostle here states reasons why a separation should not take place when there was a difference of religion between the husband and the wife. The first is, that the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife. And the object of this statement seems to be, to meet an objection which might exist in the mind, and which might, perhaps, be urged by some, "Shall I not be polluted by such a connexion? Shall I not be defiled, in the eye of God, by living in a close union with a heathen, a sinner, an enemy of God, and an opposer of the gospel?" This objection was natural, and is, doubtless, often felt. To this the apostle replies, "No; the contrary may be true. The connexion produces a species of sanctification, or diffuses a kind of holiness over the unbelieving party by the believing party, so far as to render their children holy, and therefore it is improper to seek for a separation."

Is sanctified. ηγιασται. There has been a great variety of opinions in regard to the sense of this word. It does not comport with my design to state these opinions. The usual meaning of the word is, to make holy; to set apart to a sacred use; to consecrate, etc. Jn 17:17. But the expression cannot mean here,

(1.) that the unbelieving husband would become holy, or be a Christian, by the mere fact of a connexion with a Christian, for this would be to do violence to the words, and would be contrary to facts everywhere; nor,

(2.) that the unbelieving husband had been sanctified by the Christian wife, (Whitby,) for this would not be true in all cases; nor,

(3.) that the unbelieving husband would gradually become more favourably inclined to Christianity, by observing its effects on the wife, (according to Semler;) for though this might be true, yet the apostle was speaking of something then, and which rendered their children at that time holy; nor,

(4.) that the unbelieving husband might more easily be sanctified, or become a Christian, by being connected with a Christian wife, (according to Rosenmuller and Schleusner,) because he is speaking of something in the connexion which made the children holy; and because the word αγιαζω is not used in this sense elsewhere. But it is a good rule of interpretation, that the words which are used in any place are to be limited in their signification by the connexion; and all that we are required to understand here is, that the unbelieving husband was sanctified in regard to the subject under discussion; that is, in regard to the question whether it was proper for them to live together, or whether they should be separated or not. And the sense may be, "They are by the marriage tie one flesh. They are indissolubly united by the ordinance of God. As they are one by his appointment, as they have received his sanction to the marriage union, and as one of them is holy, so the other is to be regarded as sanctified, or made so holy by the Divine sanction to the union, that it is proper for them to live together in the marriage relation." And in proof of this, Paul says if it were not so, if the connexion was to be regarded as impure and abominable, then their children were to be esteemed as illegitimate and unclean. But now they were not so regarded, and could not so be; and hence it followed that they might lawfully continue together. So Calvin, Beza, and Doddridge interpret the expression.

Else were your children unclean, ακαθαρτα. Impure; the opposite of what is meant by holy. Here observe,

(1.) that this is a reason why the parents, one of whom was a Christian and the other not, should not be separated; and,

(2.) the reason is founded on the fact, that if they were separated, the offspring of such a union must be regarded as illegitimate, or unholy; and,

(3.) it must be improper to separate in such a way, and for such a reason, because even they did not believe, and could not believe, that their children were defiled, and polluted, and subject to the shame and disgrace attending illegitimate children. This passage has often been interpreted, and is often adduced to prove that children are "federally holy," and that they are entitled to the privilege of baptism on the ground of the faith of one of the parents. But against this interpretation there are insuperable objections.

(1.) The phrase "federally holy" is unintelligible, and conveys no idea to the great mass of men. It occurs nowhere in the Scriptures, and what can be meant by it?

(2.) It does not accord with the scope and design of the argument. There is not one word about baptism here; not one allusion to it; nor does the argument in the remotest degree bear upon it. The question was not whether children should be baptized, but it was whether there should be a separation between man and wife, where the one was a Christian and the other not. Paul states, that if such a separation should take place, it would imply that the marriage was improper; and of course the children must be regarded as unclean. But how would the supposition that they were federally holy, and the proper subjects of baptism, bear on this? Would it not be equally true that it was proper to baptize the children whether the parents were separated or not? Is it not a doctrine among Paedobaptists everywhere, that the children are entitled to baptism on the faith of either of the parents, and that that doctrine is not affected by the question here agitated by Paul? Whether it was proper for them to live together or not, was it not equally true that the child of a believing parent was to be baptised? But

(3.) the supposition that this means that the children would be regarded as illegitimate if such a separation should take place, is one that accords with the whole scope and design of the argument. "When one party is a Christian and the other not, shall there be a separation?" This was the question. "No," says Paul; "if there be such a separation, it must be because the marriage is improper; because it would be wrong to live together in such circumstances." What would follow from this? Why, that all the children that have been born since the one party became a Christian, must be regarded as having been born while a connexion existed that was improper, and unchristian, and unlawful, and of course they must be regarded as illegitimate. But, says he, you do not believe this yourselves. It follows, therefore, that the connexion, even according to your own views, is proper.

(4.) This accords with the meaning of the word unclean, ακαθαρτα

(a.) in a Levitical sense, Lev 5:2;

(b.) in a moral sense, Acts 10:28, 2Cor 6:17, Eph 5:5.

The word will appropriately express the sense of illegitimacy; and the argument, I think, evidently requires this. It may be summed up in a few words. "Your separation would be a proclamation to all, that you regard the marriage as invalid and improper. From this it would follow that the offspring of such a marriage would be illegitimate. But you are not prepared to admit this; you do not believe it. Your children you esteem to be legitimate, and they are so. The marriage tie, therefore, should be regarded as binding, and separation unnecessary and improper." See, however, Doddridge and Bloomfield for a different view of this subject. I believe infant baptism to be proper and right, and an inestimable privilege to parents and to children [This is Barnes' opinion, not necessarily the opinion of Online Bible]. But a good cause should not be made to rest on feeble supports, nor on forced and unnatural interpretations of the Scriptures. And such I regard the usual interpretation placed on this passage.

But now are they holy. Holy in the same sense as the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife; for different forms of the same word are usual. That is, they are legitimate. They are not to be branded and treated as bastards, as they would be by your separation. "You regard them as having been born in lawful wedlock, and they are so; and they should be treated as such by their parents, and not be exposed to shame and disgrace by your separation.

(a) "now are they holy" Mal 2:15,16 Verse 15. But if the unbelieving depart. If they choose to leave you.

Let him depart. You cannot prevent it, and you are to submit to it patiently, and bear it as a Christian.

A brother or a sister is not under bondage, etc. Many have supposed that this means that they would be at liberty to marry again when the unbelieving wife or husband had gone away; as Calvin, Grotius, Rosenmuller, etc. But this is contrary to the strain of the argument of the apostle. The sense of the expression, "is not bound," etc. is that if they forcibly depart, the one that is left is not bound by the marriage tie to make provision for the one that departed; to do acts that might be prejudicial to religion by a violent effort to compel the departing husband or wife to live with the one that is forsaken; but is at liberty to live separate, and should regard it as proper so to do.

God hath called us to peace. Religion is peaceful. It would prevent contentions and broils. This is to be a grand principle. If it cannot be obtained by living together, there should be a peaceful separation; and where such a separation has taken place, the one which has departed should be suffered to remain separate in peace. God has called us to live in peace with all if we can. This is the general principle of religion on which we are always to act. In our relation to our partners in life, as well as in all other relations and circumstances, this is to guide us. Calvin supposes that this declaration pertains to the former part of this verse; and that Paul means to say, that if the unbelieving depart, he is to be suffered to do so peaceably, rather than to have contention and strife, for God has called us to a life of peace.

(*) "bondage" "Not enslaved" (a) "called" Rom 12:18, 14:19, Heb 12:14 (1) "to peace" "in peace" Verse 16. For what knowest thou, etc. The apostle here assigns a reason why the believing party should not separate from the other needlessly, or why he should not desire to be separated. The reason is, the possibility or the probability that the unbelieving party might be converted by the example and entreaties of the other.

Whether thou, etc., How do you know but this may be done? Is there not a possibility, nay, a probability of it, and is not this a sufficient reason for continuing together?

Save thy husband. Gain him over to the Christian faith; be the means of his conversion and salvation. Comp. Rom 11:26. We learn from this verse,

(1.) that there is a possibility that an unbelieving partner in life may be converted by example of the other.

(2.) That this should be an object of intense interest to the Christian husband or wife, because

(a) it will promote the happiness of the other;

(b) it will promote their usefulness;

(c) it will be the means of blessing their family; for parents should be united on the subject of religion, and in their example and influence in training up their sons and daughters; and

(d) because the salvation of a beloved husband or wife should be an object of intense interest.

(3.) This object is of so much importance, that the Christian should be willing to submit to much, to bear much, and to bear long, in order that it may be accomplished. Paul said it was desirable even to live with a heathen partner to do it; and so also it is desirable to bear much, very much, with even an unkind and fretful temper, with an unfaithful and even an intemperate husband, or with a perverse and peevish wife, if there is a prospect that they may be converted.

(4.) This same direction is elsewhere given, 1Pet 3:1,2.

(5.) It is often done. It is not hopeless. Many a wife has thus been the means of saving a husband; many a husband has been the means of the salvation of the wife. In regard to the means by which this is to be hoped for, we may observe that it is not by a harsh, fretful, complaining temper; it is to be by kindness, and tenderness, and love. It is to be by an exemplification of the excellency of religion by example--by patience when provoked, meekness when injured, love when despised, forbearance when words of harshness and irritation are used, and by showing how a Christian can live, and what is the true nature of religion; by kind and affectionate conversation when alone, when the heart is tender, when calamities visit the family, and when the thoughts are drawn along by the events of Providence towards death. Not by harshness or severity of manner is the result to be hoped for; but by tender entreaty, and mildness of life, and by prayer. Preeminently this is to be used. When a husband will not hear, God can hear; when he is angry, morose, or unkind, God is gentle, tender, and kind; and when a husband or a wife turn away from the voice of gentle entreaty, God's ear is open, and God is ready to hear and to bless. Let one thing guide the life. We are never to cease to set a Christian example; never to cease to live as a Christian should live; never to cease to pray fervently to the God of grace, that the partner of our lives may be brought under the full influence of Christian truth, and meet us in the enjoyments of heaven.

(b) "save thy husband" 1Pet 3:1,2 (2) "how knowest" "What" Verse 17. But as God hath distributed, etc. As God hath divided-- εμερισεν; i.e., given, imparted to any one. As God has given grace to every one. The words ειμη denote simply but in the beginning of this verse. The apostle here introduces a new subject; or an inquiry varying somewhat from that preceding, though of the same general nature. He had discussed the question whether a husband and wife ought to be separated on account of a difference in religion. He now says that the general principle there stated ought to rule everywhere; that men who become Christians ought not to seek to change their condition or calling in life, but to remain in that situation in which they were when they became Christians, and show the excellence of their religion IN that particular calling. The object of Paul, therefore, is to preserve order, industry, faithfulness in the relations of life, and to show that Christianity does not design to break up the relations of social and domestic intercourse. This discussion continues to 1Cor 7:24. The phrase, as God hath distributed," refers to the rendition in which men are placed in life, whether as rich or poor, in a state of freedom or servitude, of learning or ignorance, etc. And it implies that God appoints the lot of men, and orders the circumstances of their condition; that religion is not designed to interfere directly with this; and that men should seek to show the real excellence of religion in the particular sphere in which they may have been placed by Divine Providence before they became converted.

As the Lord hath called every one. That is, in the condition or circumstances in which any one is when he is called by the Lord to be a Christian.

So let him walk. In that sphere of life; in that calling, 1Cor 7:20; in that particular relation in which he was, let him remain, unless he can consistently change it for the better, and THERE let him illustrate the true beauty and excellence of religion. This was designed to counteract the notion that the fact of embracing a new religion dissolved the relations of life which existed before. This idea probably prevailed extensively among the Jews. Paul's object is to show that the gospel, instead of dissolving those relations, only strengthened them, and enabled those who were converted the better to discharge the duties which grow out of them.

And so ordain I, etc. This is no peculiar rule for you Corinthians. It is the universal rule which I everywhere inculcated. It is not improbable that there was occasion to insist everywhere on this rule, and to repress disorders which might have been attempted by some who might suppose that Christianity dissolved the former obligations of life.

(c) "as the Lord" 1Cor 7:20,24 (d) "And so ordain" 1Cor 4:17, 2Cor 11:28 (+) "ordain" "Appoint" Verse 18. Is any man called. Does any one become a Christian. 1Cor 7:26.

Being circumcised. Being a native-born Jew, or having become a Jewish proselyte, and having submitted to the initiatory rite of the Jewish religion.

Let him not become uncircumcised. This could not be literally done. But the apostle refers here to certain efforts which were made to remove the marks of circumcision which were often attempted by those who were ashamed of having been circumcised. The practice is often alluded to by Jewish writers, and is described by them. Comp. 1 Mac. i. 15. It is not decorous or proper here to show how this was done. The process is described in Cels. de Med. 7.25. See Grotius and Bloomfield.

Is any called in uncircumcision? A Gentile, or one who had not been circumcised.

Let him not be circumcised. The Jewish rites are not binding, and are not to be enjoined on those who have been converted from the Gentiles. Rom 2:27, seq.

(e) "uncircumcision" Acts 15:1, Gal 5:2 Verse 19. Circumcision is nothing, etc. It is of no consequence in itself. It is not that which God requires now. And the mere external rite can be of no consequence one way or the other. The heart is all; and that is what God demands. Rom 2:29.

But the keeping of the commandments of God. Is something, is the main thing, is everything; and this can be done whether a man is circumcised or not.

(a) "Circumcision" Gal 5:6, 6:15 (b) "keeping" Jn 15:14 Verse 20. Let every man abide. Let him remain or continue.

In the same calling. The same occupation, profession, rank of life. We use the word calling in the same sense to denote the occupation or profession of a man. Probably the original idea which led men to designate a profession as a calling was the belief that God called every man to the profession and rank which he occupies; that is, that it is by his arrangement, or providence, that he occupies that rank rather than another. In this way every man has a call to the profession in which he is engaged as really as ministers of the gospel; and every man should have as clear evidence that God has called him to the sphere of life in which he moves, as ministers of the gospel should have that God has called them to their appropriate profession. This declaration of Paul, that every one is to remain in the same occupation or rank in which he was when he was converted, is to be taken in a general and not in an unqualified sense. It does not design to teach that a man is in no situation to seek a change in his profession when he becomes pious. But it is intended to show that religion was the friend of order; that it did not disregard or disarrange the relations of social life; that it was fitted to produce contentment even in an humble walk, and to prevent repinings at the lot of those who were more favoured or happy. That it did not design to prevent all change is apparent from the next verse, and from the nature of the case. Some of the circumstances in which a change of condition, or of calling, may be proper when a man is converted, are the following:

(1.) When a man is a slave, and he can obtain his freedom, 1Cor 7:21.

(2.) When a man is pursuing a wicked calling or course of life when he was converted, even if it is lucrative, he should abandon it as speedily as possible. Thus if a man is engaged, as John Newton was, in the slave-trade, he should at once abandon it. If he is engaged in the manufacture or sale of ardent spirits, he should at once forsake the business, even at great personal sacrifice, and engage in a lawful and honourable employment. Acts 19:19. No considerations can justify a continuance in a course of life like this after a man is converted. No consideration can make a business which is "evil, and only evil, and that continually," proper or right.

(3.) Where a man can increase his usefulness by choosing a new profession. Thus the usefulness of many a man is greatly promoted by his leaving an agricultural or mechanical employment; or by his leaving the bar, or the mercantile profession, and becoming a minister of the gospel. In such situations, religion not only permits a man to change his profession, but it demands it; nor will God smile upon him, or bless him, unless the change is made. An opportunity to become more useful imposes an obligation to change the course of life. And no man is permitted to waste his life and talents in a mere scheme of money-making, or in self-indulgence, when by changing his calling he can do more for the salvation of the world.

(c) "abide" Prov 27:8 Verse 21. Being a servant. δουλος. A slave. Slaves abounded in Greece, and in every part of the heathen world. Athens, e.g., had, in her best days, twenty thousand freemen, and four hundred thousand slaves. See the condition of the heathen world on this subject illustrated at length, and in a very learned manner, by Rev. B. B. Edwards, in the Bib. Repository for Oct. 1835, pp. 411--436. It was a very important' subject to inquire what ought to be done in such instances. Many slaves who had been converted might argue that the institution of slavery was contrary to the rights of man; that it destroyed their equality with other men; that it was cruel, and oppressive, and unjust in the highest degree; and that therefore they ought not to submit to it, but that they should burst their bonds, and assert their rights as freemen. In order to prevent restlessness, uneasiness, and insubordination; in order to preserve the peace of society, and to prevent religion from being regarded as disorganizing and disorderly, Paul here states the principle on which the slave was to act. And by referring to this case, which was the strongest which could occur, he designed doubtless to inculcate the duty of order, and contentment in general, in all the other relations in which men might be when they were converted.

Care not for it. Let it not be a subject of deep anxiety and distress; do not deem it to be disgraceful; let it not affect your spirits; but be content in the lot of life where God has placed you. If you can in a proper way obtain your freedom, do it; if not, let it not be a subject of painful reflection. In the sphere of life where God by his providence has placed you, strive to evince the Christian spirit, and show that you are able to bear the sorrows and endure the toils of your humble lot with submission to the will of God, and so as to advance in that relation the interest of the true religion. In that calling do your duty, and evince always the spirit of a Christian. This duty is often enjoined on those who were servants, or slaves, Eph 6:5; Col 3:22, 1Timm 6:1, Tit 2:9, 1Pet 2:18. This duty of the slave, however, does not make the oppression of the master right or just, any more than the duty of one who is persecuted or reviled to be patient and meek makes the conduct of the persecutor or reviler just or right; nor does it prove that the master has a right to hold the slave as property, which can never be right in the sight of God; but it requires simply that the slave should evince, even in the midst of degradation and injury, the spirit of a Christian, just as it is required of a man who is injured in any way to bear it as becomes a follower of the Lord Jesus. Nor does this passage prove that a slave ought not to desire freedom if it can be obtained, for this is supposed in the subsequent clause. Every human being has a right to desire to be free, and to seek liberty. But it should be done, in accordance with the rules of the gospel; so as not to dishonour the religion of Christ, and so as not to injure the true happiness of others, or overturn the foundations of society.

But if thou mayest be made free. If thou canst--δυνασαιif it is in your power to become free. That is, if your master or the laws set you free; or if you can purchase your freedom; or if the laws can be changed in a regular manner. If freedom can be obtained in any manner that is not sinful. In many cases a Christian master might set his slaves free; in others, perhaps, the laws might do it; in some, perhaps, the freedom of the slave might be purchased by a Christian friend. In all these instances it would be proper to embrace the opportunity of becoming free. The apostle does not speak of insurrection, and the whole scope of the passage is against an attempt on their part to obtain freedom by force and violence. He manifestly teaches them to remain in their condition, to bear it patiently and submissively, and in that relation to bear their hard lot with a Christian spirit, unless their freedom could be obtained without violence and bloodshed. And the same duty is still binding. Evil as slavery is, and always evil and only evil, yet the Christian religion requires patience, gentleness, forbearance; not violence, war, insurrection, and bloodshed. Christianity would teach masters to be kind, tender, and gentle; to liberate their slaves, and to change the laws so that it may be done; to be just towards those whom they have held in bondage. It would not teach the slave to rise on his master, and imbrue his hands in his blood; to break up the relations of society by violence; or to dishonour his religion by the indulgence of the feelings of revenge and by murder.

Use it rather. Avail yourselves of the privilege if you can, and be a freeman. There are disadvantages attending the condition of a slave; and if you can escape from them, in a proper manner, it is your privilege and your duty to do it.

(d) "care not" Heb 13:5 Verse 22. For he that is called in the Lord. He that is called by the Lord; he that becomes a Christian.

Being a servant. A slave when he is converted.

Is the Lord's freeman. Marg., Made free. απελευθερος. Is manumitted, made free, endowed with liberty by the Lord. This is designed evidently to comfort the heart of the slave, and to make him contented with his condition; and it is a most delicate, happy, and tender argument. The sense is this: "You are blessed with freedom from the bondage of sin by the Lord. You were formerly a slave to sin, but now you are liberated. That bondage was far more grievous, and far more to be lamented, than the bondage of the body. But from that long, grievous, and oppressive servitude, you are now free. Your condition, even though you are a slave, is far better than it was before; nay, you are now the true freeman, the freeman of the Lord. Your spirit is free; while those who are not slaves, and perhaps your own masters, are even now under a more severe and odious bondage than yours. You should rejoice, therefore, in deliverance from the greater evil, and be glad that in the eye of God you are regarded as his freeman, and endowed by him with more valuable freedom than it would be to be delivered from the bondage under which you are now placed. Freedom from sin is the highest blessing that can be conferred on men; and if that is yours, you should little regard your external circumstances in this life. You will soon be admitted to the eternal liberty of the saints in glory, and will forget all your toils and privations in this world."

Is Christ's servant. Is the slave (δουλος) of Christ; is bound to obey law, and to submit himself, as you are, to the authority of another. This, too, is designed to promote contentment with his lot, by the consideration that all are bound to obey law; that there is no such thing as absolute independence; and that, since law is to be obeyed, it is not degradation and ignominy to submit to those which God has imposed on us by his providence in an humble sphere of life. Whether a freeman or a slave, we are bound to yield obedience to law, and everywhere must obey the laws of God. It is not, therefore, degradation to submit to his laws in a state of servitude, though these laws come to us through an earthly master. In this respect, the slave and the freeman are on a level, as both are required to submit to the laws of Christ; and, even if freedom could be obtained, there is no such thing as absolute independence. This is a very beautiful, delicate, and happy argument; and perhaps no consideration could be urged that would be more adapted to produce contentment.

(e) "is the Lord's freeman" Jn 8:36, Rom 6:18,22 (1) "freeman" "made free" (a) "Christ's servant" Ps 116:16, 1Pet 2:16 Verse 23. Ye are bought with a price. Though you are slaves to men, yet you have been purchased for God by the blood of his Son. 1Cor 6:20. You are, therefore, m his sight, of inestimable worth, and are bound to be his.

Be not ye the servants of men. That is, "Do not regard yourselves as the slaves OF MEN. Even in your humble relation of life, even as servants under the laws of the land, regard yourselves as the servants of God, as obeying and serving him even in this relation, since all those who are bought with a price--all Christians, whether bond or free--are in fact the servants (slaves, δουλοι) of God, yet. 22. In this relation, therefore, esteem yourselves as the servants of God, as bound by his laws, as subject to him, and as really serving him, while you yield all proper obedience to your master." Rosenmuller, Grotius, and some others, however, think that this refers to Christians in general; and that the apostle means to caution them against subjecting themselves to needless rites and customs which the false teachers would impose on them. Others have supposed (as Doddridge) that it means that they should not sell themselves into slavery; but assuredly a caution of this kind was not needful. The view given above I regard as the interpretation demanded by the connexion. And in this view it would promote contentment, and would even prevent their taking any improper measures to disturb the relations of social life, by the high and solemn consideration that even in that relation they were, in common with all Christians, the true and real servants of God. They belonged to God, and they should serve him. In all things which their masters commanded, that were in accordance with the will of God, and that could be done with a quiet conscience, they were to regard themselves as serving God: if at any time they were commanded to do that which God had forbidden, they were to remember that they were the servants of GOD, and that he was to be obeyed rather than man.

(b) "bought with a price" 1Cor 6:20 Verse 24. Brethren, etc. 1Cor 7:20.

(c) "let every men" 1Cor 7:17,20 Verse 25. Now concerning virgins. This commences the third subject on which the opinion of Paul seems to have been asked by the church at Corinth--whether it was proper that those who had unmarried daughters, or wards, should give them in marriage. The reason why this question was proposed may have been, that many in the church at Corinth were the advocates of celibacy, and this, perhaps, on two grounds:

(1.) Some may have supposed that in the existing state of things--the persecutions and trials to which Christians were exposed--it would be advisable that a man who had unmarried daughters, or wards, should keep them from the additional cares and trials to which they would be exposed with a family; and,

(2.) some may have already been the advocates for celibacy, and have maintained that that state was more favourable to piety, and was altogether to be preferred. It is known that that opinion had an early prevalence, and gave rise to the establishment of nunneries in the papal church; an opinion that has everywhere been attended with licentiousness and corruption. It is not improbable that there may have been advocates for this opinion even in the church of Corinth; and it was well, therefore, that the authority of an apostle should be employed to sanction and to honour the marriage union.

I have no commandment, etc. No positive, express revelation. 1Cor 7:6, 1Cor 7:10.

Yet I give my judgment. I give my opinion, or advice. 1Cor 2:6.

As one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord. As a Christian; one who has been pardoned, whose mind has been enlightened, and who has been endued with the grace of God.

To be faithful. Faithful to my God. As one who would not give advice for any selfish, or mercenary, or worldly consideration; as one known to act from a desire to. honour God, and to seek the best interests of the church, even though there is no explicit command. The advice of such a man--a devoted, faithful, self-denying, experienced Christian--is entitled to respectful deference, even where there is no claim to inspiration. Religion qualifies to give advice; and the advice of a man who has no selfish ends to gratify, and who is known to seek supremely the glory of God, should not be disregarded or slighted. Paul had a special claim to give this advice, because he was the founder of the church at Corinth.

(*) "virgins" "Single persons" (d) "commandment" 1Cor 7:6,10,40 (e) "faithful" 1Timm 1:12 Verse 26. I suppose. I think; I give the following advice.

For the present distress. In the present state of trial. The word distress, αναγκην, necessity, denotes calamity, persecution, trial, etc. See Lk 21:23. The word rendered present, (ενεστωσαν,) denotes that which urges on, or that which at that time presses on, or afflicts. Here it is implied,

(1.) that at that time they were subject to trials so severe as to render the advice which he was about to give proper; and,

(2.) that he by no means meant that this should be a permanent arrangement in the church, and of course it cannot be urged as an argument for the monastic system. What the urgent distress of this time was, is not certainly known. If the epistle was written about A.D. 59, (see the Introduction,) it was in the time of Nero; and probably he had already begun to oppress and persecute Christians. At all events, it is evident that the Christians at Corinth were subject to some trials which rendered the cares of the marriage life undesirable.

It is good for a man so to be. The emphasis here is on the word so, (ουτως;) that is, it is best for a man to conduct [himself] in the following manner; the word so referring to the advice which follows. "I advise that he conduct [himself] in the following manner, to wit." Most commentators suppose that it means, as he is; i.e., unmarried; but the interpretation proposed above best suits the connexion. The advice given is in the following verses.

(f) "that it is good" 1Cor 7:1,8 Verse 27. Art thou bound unto a wife? Art thou already married? Marriage is often thus represented as a tie, a bond, etc. Rom 7:2.

Seek not to be loosed. Seek not a dissolution (λυσιν) of the connexion, either by divorce or by a separation from each other. 1Cor 7:10, also 1Cor 7:11-17.

Art thou loosed from a wife? Art thou unmarried? It should have been rendered, free from a wife; or, art thou single? It does not imply of necessity that the person had been married, though it may have that meaning, and signify those who had been separated from a wife by her death. There is no necessity of supposing that Paul refers to persons who had divorced their wives. So Grotius, Schleusner, Doddridge, etc, Verse 28. Thou hast not sinned. There is no express command of God on this subject, The counsel which I give is mere advice, and it may be observed or not, as you shall judge best. Marriage is honourable and lawful; and though there may be circumstances where it is advisable not to enter into this relation, yet there is no law which prohibits it. The same advice would be proper now, if it were a time of persecution; or if a man is poor, and cannot support a family, or if he has already a dependent mother and sisters to be supported by him, it would be well to follow the advice of Paul. So also when the cares of a family would take up a man's time and efforts; when but for this he might give himself to a missionary life, the voice of wisdom may be in accordance with that of Paul; that a man may be free from these cares, and may give himself with more undivided interest and more successful toil to the salvation of man.

Such shall have trouble in the flesh. They shall have anxiety, care, solicitude, trials. Days of persecution are coming on, and you may be led to the stake; and in those fiery trials, your families may be torn asunder, and a part be put to death. Or you may be poor, and oppressed, and driven from your homes, and made wanderers and exiles, for the sake of your religion.

But I spare you. I will not dwell on the melancholy theme. I will not pain your hearts by describing the woes that shall ensue. I will not do anything to deter you from acting as you deem right. If you choose to marry, it is lawful; and I will not imbitter your joys and harrow up your feelings by the description of your future difficulties and trials. The word flesh here denotes outward circumstances, in contradistinction from the mind. They might have peace of mind, for religion would furnish that; but they would be exposed to poverty, persecution, and calamity.

(g) "thou hast not sinned" (*) "shall" "will" Verse 29. But this I say. Whether you are married or not, or in whatever condition of life you may be, I would remind you that life hastens to a close, and that its grand business is to be prepared to die. It matters little in what condition or rank of life we are, if we are ready to depart to another and a better world.

The time is short. The time is contracted, drawn into a narrow space, (συνεσταλμενος.) The word which is here used is commonly applied to the act of furling a sail, i.e., reducing it into a narrow compass; and is then applied to anything that is reduced within narrow limits. Perhaps there was a reference here to the fact that the time was contracted, or made short, by their impending persecutions and trials. But it is always equally true that time is short. It will soon glide away, and come to a close. The idea of the apostle here is, that the plans of life should all be formed in view of this truth, THAT TIME IS SHORT. No plan should be adopted which does not contemplate this; no engagement of life made when it will not be appropriate to think of it; no connexion entered into when the thought, "time is short," would be an unwelcome intruder. See 1Pet 4:7, 2Pet 3:8,9.

It remaineth. τολοιπον. The remainder is; or this is a consequence from this consideration of the shortness of time.

Both they that have wives, etc. This does not mean that they are to treat them with unkindness or neglect, or fail in the duties of love and fidelity. It is to be taken in a general sense, that they were to live above the world; that they were not to be unduly attached to them; that they were to be ready to part with them; and that they should not suffer attachment to them to interfere with any duty which they owed to God. They were in a world of trial; and they were exposed to persecution; and as Christians they were bound to live entirely to God; and they ought not, therefore, to allow attachment to earthly friends to alienate their affections from God, or to interfere with their Christian duty. In one word, they ought to be just as faithful to God, and just as pious, in every respect, as if they had no wife and no earthly friend. Such a consecration to God is difficult, but not impossible. Our earthly attachments and cares draw away our affections from God, but they need not do it. Instead of being the occasion of alienating our affections from God, they should be, and they might be, the means of binding us more firmly and entirely to him and his cause. But alas! how many professing Christians live for their wives and children only, and not for God in these relations! How many suffer these earthly objects of attachment to alienate their minds from God, rather than make them the occasion of uniting them more tenderly to him and his cause!

(a) "time is short" 1Pet 4:7, 2Pet 3:8,9 Verse 30. And they that weep. They who are afflicted.

As though they wept not. Restraining and moderating their grief by the hope of the life to come. The general idea in all these expressions is, that in whatever situation Christians are, they should be dead to the world, and not improperly affected by passing events. It is impossible for human nature not to feel when persecuted, maligned, slandered, or when near earthly friends are taken away. But religion will calm the troubled spirit; pour oil on the agitated waves; light up a smile in the midst of tears; cause the beams of a calm and lovely morning to rise on the anxious heart; silence the commotions of the agitated soul, and produce joy even in the midst of sorrow. Religion will keep us from immoderate grief, and sustain the soul even when in distress nature forces us to shed the tear of mourning. Christ sweat great drops of blood, and Christians often weep; but the heart may be calm, peaceful, elevated, confident in God, in the darkest night and the severest tempest of calamity.

And they that rejoice. They that are happy; they that are prospered; that have beloved families around them; that are blessed with success, with honour, with esteem, with health. They that have occasion of rejoicing and gratitude.

As though they rejoiced not. Not rejoicing with excessive or immoderate joy; not with riot or unholy mirth; not satisfied with these things, though they may rejoice in them; not forgetting that they must soon be left; but keeping the mind in a calm, serious, settled, thoughtful state, in view of the fact that all these things must soon come to an end. Oh, how would this thought silence the voice of unseemly mirth! How would it produce calmness, serenity, heavenly joy, where is now often unhallowed riot; and true peace, where now there is only forced and boisterous revelry!

As though they possessed not. It is right to buy and to obtain property; but it should be held with the conviction that it is by an uncertain tenure, and must soon be left. Men may give a deed that shall secure from their fellow-men; but no man can give a title that shall not be taken away by death. Our lands and houses, our stocks and bonds and mortgages, our goods and chattels, shall soon pass into other hands. Other men will plough our fields, reap our harvests, work in our shops, stand at our counters, sit down at our firesides, eat on our tables, lie upon our beds. Others will occupy our places in society, have our offices, sit in our seats in the sanctuary. Others will take possession of our gold, and appropriate it to their own use; and we shall have no more interest in it, and no more control over it, than our neighbour has now, and no power to eject the man that has taken possession of our houses and our lands. Secure, therefore, as our titles are, safe as are our investments, yet how soon shall we lose all interest in them by death; and how ought this consideration to induce us to live above the world, and to secure a treasure in that world where no thief approaches, and no moth corrupts. Verse 31. And they that use this world. That make a necessary and proper use of it to furnish raiment, food, clothing, medicine, protection, etc. It is right so to use the world, for it was made for these purposes. The word using here refers to the lawful use of it, (χρωμενοι.)

As not abusing it. καταχρωμενοι. The preposition κατα, in composition, here has the sense of too much, too freely, and is taken not merely in an intensive sense, but to denote evil, the abuse of the world. It means that we are not to use it to excess; we are not to make it a mere matter of indulgences, or to make that the main object and purpose of our living. We are not to give our appetites to indulgence our bodies to riot; our days and nights to feasting and revelry.

For the fashion of this world. τοσχημα. The form, the appearance. In 1Jn 2:17, it is said that "the world passeth away and the lust thereof." The word "fashion" here is probably taken from the shifting scenes of the drama; where, when the scene changes, the imposing and splendid pageantry passes off. The form, the fashion of the world is like a splendid, gilded pageant. It is unreal and illusive. It continues but a little time; and soon the scene changes, and the fashion that allured and enticed us now passes away, and we pass to other scenes.

Passeth away. παραγει. Passes off like the splendid, gaudy, shifting scenes of the stage. What a striking description of the changing, unstable, and unreal pageantry of this world! Now it is gay, splendid, gorgeous, lovely; tomorrow it is gone, and is succeeded by new actors and new scenes. Now all is busy with one set of actors; tomorrow a new company appears, and again they are succeeded by another, and all are engaged in scenes that are equally changing, vain, gorgeous, and delusive. A similar idea is presented in the wellknown and beautiful description of the great British dramatist: "All the world's a stage,

And all the men and women merely players.

They have their exits and their entrances.

And one man in his time plays many parts."

If such be the character of the scenes in which we are engaged, how little should we fix our affections on them, and how anxious should we be to be prepared for the real and unchanging scenes of another world!

(b) "fashion" Ps 39:6, Jas 4:14, 1Pet 4:7, 1Jn 2:17 Verse 32. But I would have you. I would advise you to such a course of life as should leave you without carefulness. My advice is regulated by that wish, and that wish guides me in giving it.

Without carefulness, αμεριμνους. Without anxiety, solicitude, care; without such a necessary attention to the things of this life as to take off your thoughts and affections from heavenly objects. Mt 6:25 and Mt 6:26-31.

Careth for the things that belong to the Lord. Marg., "The things of the Lord ;" the things of religion. His attention is not distracted by the cares of this life; his time is not engrossed, and his affections alienated, by an attendance on the concerns of a family, and especially by solicitude for them in times of trial and persecution. He can give his main attention to the things of religion. He is at leisure to give his chief thoughts and anxieties to the advancement of the Redeemer's kingdom. Paul's own example showed that this was the course which he preferred; and showed also that in some instances it was lawful and proper for a man to remain unmarried, and to give himself entirely to the work of the Lord. But the Divine commandment, (Gen 1:28,) and the commendation everywhere bestowed upon marriage in the Scriptures, as well as the nature of the case, show that it was not designed that celibacy should be general.

(*) "carefulness" "Anxious care" (a) "unmarried" 1Timm 5:5 (1) "things" "Of the Lord, as 1Cor 7:34" Verse 33. Careth for the things that are of the world. Is under a necessity of giving attention to the things of the world; or cannot give his undivided attention and interest to the things of religion. This would be especially true in times of persecution.

How he mast please his wife. How he may gratify her; how he may accommodate himself to her temper and wishes, to make her happy. The apostle here plainly intimates that there would be danger that the man would be so anxious to gratify his wife, as to interfere with his direct religious duties. This may be done in many ways.

(1.) The affections may be taken off from the Lord, and bestowed upon the wife. She may become the object of even improper attachment, and may take the place of God in the affections.

(2.) The time may be taken up in devotion to her, which should be given to secret prayer, and to the duties of religion.

(3.) She may demand his society and attention when he ought to be engaged in doing good to others, and endeavouring to advance the kingdom of Christ.

(4.) She may be gay and fashionable, and may lead him into improper expenses, into a style of living that may be unsuitable for a Christian, and into society where his piety will be injured, and his devotion to God lessened; or,

(5.) she may have erroneous opinions on the doctrines and duties of religion; and a desire to please her may lead him insensibly to modify his views, and to adopt more lax opinions, and to pursue a more lax course of life in his religious duties. Many a husband has thus been injured by a gay, thoughtless, and imprudent wife; and though that wife may be a Christian, yet her course may be such as shall greatly retard his growth in grace, and mar the beauty of his piety. Verse 34. Between a wife and a virgin. Between a woman that is married and one that is unmarried. The apostle says, that a similar difference between the condition of her that is married and her that is unmarried takes place, which had been observed between the married and the unmarried man. The Greek word here (μεμερισται) may mean, is divided, and be rendered, "the wife and the virgin are divided in the same manner;" i.e., there is the same difference in their case as exists between the married and the unmarried man.

The unmarried woman, etc. Has more advantages for attending to the things of religion; has fewer temptations to neglect her proper duty to God.

Both in body and in spirit. Entirely holy; that she may be entirely devoted to God. Perhaps in her case the apostle mentions the "body," which he had not done in the case of the man, because her temptation would be principally in regard to that--the danger of endeavouring to decorate and adorn her person to please her husband.

How she may please her husband. The apostle here intends, undoubtedly, to intimate that there were dangers to personal piety in the married life, which would not occur in a state of celibacy; and that the unmarried female would have greater opportunities for devotion and usefulness than if married. And he intimates that the married female would be in danger of losing her zeal, and marring her piety, by attention to her husband, and by a constant effort to please him. Some of the ways in which this might be done are the following:

(1.) As in the former case, 1Cor 7:33, her affections might be transferred from God to the partner of her life.

(2.) Her time will be occupied by an attention to him and to his will; and there would be danger that that attention would be allowed to interfere with her hours of secret retirement and communion with God.

(3.) Her time would be necessarily broken in upon by the cares of a family; and she should therefore guard with peculiar vigilance, that she may redeem time for secret communion with God.

(4.) The time which she before gave to benevolent objects may now be given to please her husband. Before her marriage she may have been distinguished for zeal, and for active efforts in every plan of doing good; subsequently, she may lay aside this zeal, and withdraw from these plans, and be as little distinguished as others.

(5.) Her piety may be greatly injured by false notions of what should be done to please her husband. If he is a worldly and fashionable man, she may seek to please him by "gold, and pearls, and costly array." Instead of cultivating the ornament of "a meek and quiet spirit," her main wish may be to decorate her person, and render herself attractive by the adorning of her person rather than of her mind.

(6.) If he is opposed to religion, or if he has lax opinions on the subject, or if he is skeptical and worldly, she will be in danger of relaxing in her views in regard to the strictness of Christianity, and of becoming conformed to his. She will insensibly become less strict in regard to the Sabbath, the Bible, the prayer-meeting, the Sabbath-school, the plans of Christian benevolence, the doctrines of the gospel.

(7.) To please him, she will be found in the gay circle--perhaps in the assembly room, or even the theatre, or amidst companies of gaiety and amusement--and will forget that she is professedly devoted only to God. And,

(8.) she is in danger, as the result of all this, of forsaking her old religious friends, the companions of purer, brighter days, the humble and devoted friends of Jesus; and of seeking society among the gay, the rich, the proud, the worldly. Her piety thus is injured; she becomes worldly and vain, and less and less like Christ; until Heaven, perhaps, in mercy smites her idol; and he dies, and leaves her again to the blessedness of single-hearted devotion to God. Oh, how many a Christian female has thus been injured by an unhappy marriage with a gay and worldly man! How often has the church occasion to mourn over piety that is dimmed, benevolence that is quenched, zeal that is extinguished, by devotion to a gay and worldly husband! How often does humble piety weep over such a scene! How often does the cause of sacred charity sigh! How often is the Redeemer wounded in the house of his friends! And oh, how often does it become NECESSARY for God to interpose, and to remove by death the object of the affection of his wandering child, and to clothe her in the habiliments of mourning, and to bathe her cheeks in tears, that "by the sadness of the countenance her heart may be made better!" Who can tell how many a widow is made sucK from this cause? Who can tell how much religion is injured by thus stealing away the affections from God?

(b) "married" Lk 10:40-42 Verse 35. For your own profit. That you may avail yourselves of all your advantages and privileges, and pursue such a course as shall tend most to advance your personal piety and salvation.

Not that I may cast a snare upon you. The word rendered snare (βροχον) means a cord, a rope, a bond; and the sense is, that Paul would not bind them by any rule which God had not made; or that he would not restrain them from that which is lawful, and which the welfare of society usually requires. Paul means, that his object in his advice was their welfare; it was not by any means to bind, fetter, or restrain them from any course which would be for their real happiness, but to promote their real and permanent advantage, The idea which is here presented by the word snare, is usually conveyed by the use of the word yoke, Mt 11:29, Acts 15:10, Gal 5:1, and sometimes by the word burden, Mt 23:4, Acts 15:28.

But for that which is comely. (ευσχημον.) Decorous, fit, proper, noble. For that which is best fitted to your present condition, and which, on the whole, will be best, and most for your own advantage. There would be a fitness and propriety in their pursuing the course which he recommended.

That ye may attend upon the Lord. That you may engage in religious duties and serve God.

Without distraction. Without being drawn away, (απερισπαστως;) without care, interruption, and anxiety. That you may be free to engage with undivided interest in the service of the Lord.

(+) "profit" "Advantage" (*) "comely" "becoming" Verse 36. That he behaveth himself uncomely. Acts an unbecoming part; imposes an unnecessary, painful, and improper constraint; crosses her inclinations which are in themselves proper.

Toward his virgin. His daughter, or his ward, or any unmarried female committed to his care.

If she pass the flower of her age. If she pass the marriageable age, and remains unmarried. It is well known that in the east it was regarded as peculiarly dishonourable to remain unmarried; and the authority of a father, therefore, might be the means of involving his daughter in shame and disgrace. When this would be the case, it would be wrong to prohibit her marriage.

And need so require. And she ought to be allowed to marry. If it will promote her happiness; and if she would be unhappy, and regarded as dishonoured, if she remained in a state of celibacy.

Let him do what he will. He has the authority in the case; for in the east the authority resided with the father. He may either give her in marriage or not, as he pleases. But in this case it is advisable that she should marry.

He sinneth not. He errs not; he will do nothing positively wrong in the case. Marriage is lawful, and in this case it is advisable; and he may consent to it, for the reasons above stated, without error or impropriety.

(+) "uncomely" "unbecoming" (++) "virgin" "virgin daughter" Verse 37. Nevertheless. But. The apostle in this verse states some instances where it would not be proper to give a daughter in marriage; and the verse is a kind of summing up of all that he had said on the subject.

That standeth steadfast in his heart, etc. Most commentators have understood this of the father of the virgin, and suppose that it refers to his purpose of keeping her from the marriage connexion. The phrase, to stand stedfast, is opposed to a disposition that is vacillating, unsettled, etc., and denotes a man who has command of himself, who adheres to his purpose, a man who has hitherto adhered to his purpose, and to whose happiness and reputation it is important that he should be known as one who is not vacillating, or easily moved.

Having no necessity. Where there is nothing in her disposition or inclination that would make marriage necessary, or when there is no engagement or obligation that would be violated if she did not marry.

But hath power over his own will. Hath power to do as he pleases; is not bound in the case by another. When there is no engagement, or contract, made in childhood, or promise made in early life that would bind him. Often daughters were espoused, or promised, when they were very young; and in such a case a man would be bound to adhere to his engagement; and much as he might desire the reverse, and her celibacy, yet he would not have power over his own will, or be at liberty to withhold her.

And hath so decreed in his heart. Has so judged, determined, resolved.

That he will keep his virgin. His daughter, or ward, in an unmarried state. He has power and authority to do it, and if he does it he will not sin.

Doeth well. In either of these cases, he does well. If he has a daughter, and chooses to retain her in an unmarried state, he does well or right.

(&) "decreed" "determined" Verse 38. Doeth well. Does right; violates no law in it, and is not to be blamed for it.

Doeth better. Does that which is on the whole to be preferred, if it can be done. He more certainly, in the present circumstances, consults here happiness by withholding her from the marriage connexion than he could by allowing her to enter it.

(a) "So then" Rom 7:2 Verse 39. The wife is bound, etc. Rom 7:2.

Only in the Lord. That is, only to one who is a Christian; with a proper sense of her obligations to Christ, and so as to promote his glory. The apostle supposed that could not be done if she were allowed to marry a heathen, or one of a different religion. The same sentiment he advances in 2Cor 6:14; and it was his intention, undoubtedly, to affirm that it was proper for a widow to marry no one who was not a Christian. The reasons at that time would be obvious.

(1.) They could have no sympathy and fellow-feeling on the most important of all subjects, if the one was a Christian and the other a heathen. See 2Cor 6:14,15, etc.

(2.) If she should marry a heathen, would it not be showing that she had not as deep a conviction of the importance and truth of her religion as she ought to have? If Christians were required to be "separate," to be "a peculiar people," not "to be conformed to the world," how could these precepts be obeyed if the society of a heathen was voluntarily chosen, and if she became united to him for life?

(3.) She would in this way greatly hinder her usefulness; put herself in the control of one who had no respect for her religion, and who would demand her time and attention, and thus interfere with her attendance on the public and private duties of religion, and the offices of Christian charity.

(4.) She would thus greatly endanger her piety. There would be danger from the opposition, the taunts, the sneers of the enemy of Christ; from the secret influence of living with a man who had no respect for God; from his introducing her into society thus was irreligious, and that would tend to mar the beauty of her piety, and to draw her away from simple-hearted devotion to Jesus Christ? And do not these reasons apply to similar cases now? And if so, is not the law still binding? Do not such unions now, as really as they did then, place the Christian where there is no mutual sympathy on the subject dearest to the Christian heart? Do they not show that she who forms such a union has not as deep a sense of the importance of piety, and of the pure and holy nature of her religion, as she ought to have? Do they not take time from God and from charity? break up plans of usefulness, and lead away from the society of Christians, and from the duties of religion? Do they not expose often to ridicule, to reproach, to persecution, to contempt, and to pain? Do they not often lead into society, by a desire to please the partner in life, where there is no religion, where God is excluded, where the name of Christ is never heard, and where the piety is marred, and the beauty of simple Christian piety is dimmed? And if so, are not such marriages contrary to the law of Christ? I confess that this verse, to my view, proves that all such marriages are a violation of the New Testament; and if they are, they should not on any plea be entered into; and it will be found, in perhaps nearly all instances, that they are disastrous to the piety of the married Christian, and the occasion of ultimate regret, and the cause of a loss of comfort, peace, and usefulness in the married life.

(b) "The wife is bound" Rom 7:2 (c) "only in the Lord" 2Cor 6:14 Verse 40. If she so abide. If she remain a widow, even if she could be married to a Christian.

After my judgment. In my opinion, 1Cor 7:25.,

And I think also that I have the Spirit of God. Macknight and others suppose that this phrase implies entire certainty; and that Paul means to affirm that in this he was clear that he was under the influence of inspiration. He appeals for the use of the term (δοκω) to Mk 10:42, Lk 8:18, 1Cor 4:9, 8:2, 11:16, Heb 4:1, etc. But the word does not usually express absolute certainty. It implies a doubt, though there may be a strong persuasion or conviction; or the best judgment which the mind can form in the case. See Mt 6:7, 26:53, Mk 6:49 Lk 8:18, 10:36, 12:51, 13:2,4, 22:24, Acts 17:18, 25:27, 1Cor 12:22, etc. It implies here a belief that Paul was under the influence of the infallible Spirit, and that his advice was such as accorded with the will of God. Perhaps he alludes to the fact that the teachers at Corinth deemed themselves to be under the influence of inspiration; and Paul said that he judged also of himself that he was divinely guided and directed in what he said.--Calvin. And as Paul in this could not be mistaken; as his impression that he was under the influence of that Spirit was, in fact, a claim to Divine inspiration, so this advice should be regarded as of Divine authority, and as binding on all. This interpretation is further demanded by the circumstances of the case. It was necessary that he should assert Divine authority to counteract the teaching of the false instructors in Corinth; and that he should interpose that authority in prescribing rules for the government of the church there, in view of the peculiar temptations to which they were exposed.

(d) "my judgment" 1Cor 7:25 (e) I think" 2Pet 3:15 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- REMARKS On 1st Corinthians CHAPTER 7

We learn from this chapter,

(1.) The sacredness of the marriage union; and the nature of the feelings with which it should be entered, 1Cor 7:1-13. On a most delicate subject Paul has shown a seriousness and delicacy of expression which can be found in no other writings, and which demonstrate how pure his own mind was, and how much it was filled with the fear of God. In all things his aim is to promote purity, and to keep from the Christian church the innumerable evils which everywhere abounded in the pagan world. The marriage connexion should be formed in the fear of God. In all that union, the parties should seek the salvation of the soul; and so live as not to dishonour the religion which they profess.

(2.) The duty of labouring earnestly for the conversion of the party in the marriage connexion that may be a stranger to piety, 1Cor 7:16. This object should lie very near the heart; and it should be sought by all the means possible. By a pure and holy life; by exemplifying the nature of the gospel; by tenderness of conversation and of entreaty; and by fidelity in all the duties of life, we should seek the conversion and salvation of our partners in the marriage connexion. Even if both are Christians, this great object should be one of constant solicitude-to advance the piety and promote the usefulness of the partner in life.

(3.) The duty of contentment in the sphere of life in which we are placed, 1Cor 7:18, etc. It is no disgrace to be poor, for Jesus chose to be poor, It is no disgrace, though it is a calamity, to be a slave. It is no disgrace to be in an humble rank of life. It is disgraceful only to be a sinner, and to murmur and repine at our allotment. God orders the circumstances of our life; and they are well-ordered when under the direction of his hand. The great object should be to do right in the relation which we sustain in life. If poor, to be industrious, submissive, resigned, virtuous; if rich, to be grateful, benevolent, kind. If a slave or a servant, to be faithful, kind, and obedient; using liberty, if it can be lawfully obtained; resigned, and calm, and gentle, if by the providence of God such must continue to be the lot in life.

(4.) The duty of preserving the order and regularity of society, 1Cor 7:20-23. The design of the gospel is not to produce insubordination or irregularity. It would not break up society; does not dissolve the bonds of social life; but it cements and sanctifies the ties which connect us with those around us. It is designed to promote human happiness; and that is promoted, not by resolving society into its original elements; not by severing the marriage tie, as atheists would do; not by teaching children to disregard and despise their parents, or the common courtesies of life, but by teaching them to maintain inviolate all these relations. Religion promotes the interests of society; it does not, like infidelity, dissolve them. It advances the cause of social virtue; it does not, like atheism, retard and annihilate it. Every Christian becomes a better parent, a more affectionate child, a kinder friend, a more tender husband or wife, a more kind neighbour, a better member of the community.

(5.) Change in a man's calling should not be made from a slight cause. A Christian should not make it unless his former calling were wrong, or unless he can by it extend his own usefulness, But when that can be done, he should do it, and do it without delay. If the course is wrong, it should be forthwith abandoned. No consideration can make it right to continue it for a day or an hour; no matter what may be the sacrifice of property, it should be done. If a man is engaged in the slave-trade, or in smuggling goods, or in piracy, or in highway robbery, or in the manufacture and sale of poison, it should be at once and for ever abandoned. And in like manner, if a young man who is converted can increase his usefulness by changing his plan of life, it should be done as soon as practicable. If by becoming a minister of the gospel he can be a more useful man, every consideration demands that he should leave any other profession, however lucrative or pleasant, and submit to the self-denials, the cares, the trials, and the toils which attend a life devoted to Christ in the ministry, in Christian or pagan lands. Though it should be attended with poverty, want, tears, toil, or shame, yet the single question is, "Can I be more useful to my Master there than in my present vocation? " If he can be, that is an indication of the will of God which he cannot disregard with impunity.

(6.) We should live above this world, 1Cor 7:29,30. We should partake of all our pleasures, and endure all our sufferings, with the deep feeling that we have here no continuing city, and no abiding place. Soon all our earthly pleasures will fade away; soon all our earthly sorrows will be ended. A conviction of the shortness of life will tend much to regulate our desires for earthly comforts, and will keep us from being improperly attached to them; and it will diminish our sorrows by the prospect that they will soon end.

(7.) We should not be immoderately affected with grief, 1Cor 7:30. It will all soon end, in regard to Christians. Whether our tears arise from the consciousness of our sins, or the sins of others; whether from persecution, or contempt of the world; or whether from the loss of health, property, or friends, we should bear it all patiently, for it will soon end; a few days, and all will be over; and the last tear shall fall on our cheeks, and the last sigh be heaved from our bosom.

(8.) We should not be immoderate in our joy, 1Cor 7:30. Our highest earthly joys will soon cease. Mirth, and the sound of the harp and the viol, the loud laugh and the song, will soon close. What a change should this thought make in a world of gaiety, and mirth, and song. It should not rage men gloomy and morose; but it should make them serious, calm, thoughtful. Oh, did all feel that death was near, that the solemn realities of eternity were approaching, what a change would it make in a gay and thoughtless world! How would it close the theatre and the ball-room; how would it silence the jest, the jeer, and the loud laugh; and how would it diffuse seriousness and calmness over a now gay and thoughtless world! "Laughter is mad," says Solomon; and in a world of sin, and sorrow, and death, assuredly seriousness and calm contemplation are demanded by every consideration.

(9.) What an effect would the thought that "time is short," and that "the fashion of this world passeth away," have on the lovers of wealth! It would,

1st, teach them that property is of little value.

2nd. That the possession of it can constitute no distinction beyond the grave; the rich man is just as soon reduced to dust, and is just as offensive in his splendid mausoleum, as the poor beggar.

3rd. A man feeling this, would be led (or should be) to make a good use of his property on earth. Lk 16:1 and Lk 16:2-9.

4th. He would be led to seek a better inheritance--an interest in the treasures that no moth corrupts, and that never fade away. Mt 6:20. This single thought, that the fashion of this world is soon to pass away--an idea which no man can doubt or deny, if allowed to take firm hold of the mind--would change the entire aspect of the world.

(10.) We should endeavour so to live in all things, as that our minds should not be oppressed with undue anxiety and care, 1Cor 7:32. In all our arrangements and plans, and in all the relations of life, our grand object should be to have the mind free for the duties and privileges of religion. We should seek not to be encumbered with care; not to be borne down with anxiety; not to be unduly attached to the things of this life.

(11.) We should enter into the relations of life so as not to interfere with our personal piety or usefulness, but so as to promote both, 1Cor 7:32-35. All our arrangements should be so formed as that we may discharge our religious duties, and promote our usefulness to our fellow-men. But alas! how many enter into the marriage relation with unchristian companions, whose active zeal is for ever quenched by such a connexion! How many form commercial connexions or partnerships in business with those who are not Christians, where the result is to diminish their zeal for God, and to render their whole lives useless to the church! And how much do the cares of life, in all its relations, interfere with simple-hearted piety, and with the faithful discharge of the duties which we owe to God and to a dying world! May God of his mercy enable us so to live in all the relations of life, as that our usefulness shall not be retarded, but augmented; and so to live that we can see, without one sigh of regret, the "fashion of this world pass away;" our property or our friends removed; or even the magnificence of the entire world, with all its palaces, and temples, and "cloud-capped towers," passing away amidst the fires that shall attend the consummation of all things!

1 Corinthians 8

Introduction to 1st Corinthians Chapter 8

IN this chapter another subject is discussed, which had been proposed by the church at Corinth for the decision of the apostle:

Whether it was right for Christians to partake of the meat that had been offered in sacrifice to idols? On this question there would be doubtless a difference of opinion kmong the Corinthian Christians. When those sacrifices were made to heathen gods, a part of the animal was given to the priest that officiated, a part was consumed on the altar, and a part (probably the principal part) was the property of him who offered it. This part was either eaten by him at home, as food which had been in some sense consecrated or blessed by having been offered to an idol; or it was partaken of at a feast in honour of the idol; or it was in some instances exposed for sale in the market, in the same way as other meat. Whether, therefore, it would be right to partake of that food, either when invited to the house of a heathen friend, or when it was exposed for sale in the market, was a question which could not but present itself to a conscientious Christian. The objection to partaking of it would be, that to partake of it either in the temples or at the feasts of their heathen neighbours, would be to lend their countenance to idolatry. On the other hand, there were many who supposed that it was always lawful, and that the scruples of their brethren were needless. Some of their arguments Paul has alluded to in the course of the chapter: they were, that an idol was nothing in the world; that there was but one God, and that every one must know this; and that, therefore; there was no danger that any worshipper of the true God could be led into the absurdities of idolatry, 1Cor 8:4-6. To this the apostle replies, that though there might be this knowledge, yet

(1.) knowledge sometimes puffed up, and made us proud, and that we should be careful lest it should lead us astray by our vain self-confidence, 1Cor 8:1,2,7.

(2.) That all had not that knowledge, (1Cor 8:7) and that they even then, notwithstanding all the light which had been shed around them by Christianity, and notwithstanding the absurdity of idolatry, still regarded an idol as a real existence, as a god, and worshipped it as such; and that it would be highly improper to countenance in any way that idea. He left the inference, therefore, that it was not proper, from this argument, to partake of the sacrifices to idols.

A second argument in favour of partaking of that food is alluded to in 1Cor 8:8; to wit, that it must be in itself a matter of indifference; that it could make no difference before God, where all depended on moral purity and holiness of heart, whether a man had eaten meat or not; that we were really no better or worse for it; and that, therefore, it was proper to partake of that food. To this Paul replies,

(1.) that though this was true, as an abstract proposition, yet it might be the occasion of leading others into sin, 1Cor 8:9.

(2.) That the effect on a weak brother would be to lead him to suppose that an idol was something, and to confirm him in his supposition that an idol should have some regard, and be worshipped in the temple, 1Cor 8:10.

(3.) That the consequence might be, that a Christian of little information and experience might be drawn away and perish, 1Cor 8:11.

(4.) That this would be to sin against Christ, if a feeble Christian should be thus destroyed, 1Cor 8:12. And,

(5.) that as for himself, if indulgence in meat was in any way the occasion of making another sin, he would eat no meat as long as the world stood, (1Cor 8:13;) since to abstain from meat was a far less evil than the injury or destruction of an immortal soul.

Verse 1. Now as touching. In regard to; in answer to your inquiry whether it is right or not to partake of those things.

Things offered unto idols. Sacrifices unto idols. Meat that had been offered in sacrifice, and then either exposed to sale in the market, or served up at the feasts held in honour of idols at their temples, or at the houses of their devotees. The priests, who were entitled to a part of the meat that was offered in sacrifice, would expose it to sale in the market; and it was a custom with the Gentiles to make feasts in honour of the idol gods on the meat that was offered in sacrifice. See 1Cor 8:10 of this chapter, and 1Cor 10:20,21. Some Christians would hold that there could be no harm in partaking of this meat any more than any other meat, since an idol was nothing; and others would have many scruples in regard to it, since it would seem to countenance idol worship. The request made of Paul was, that he should settle some general principle which they might all safely follow.

We know. We admit; we cannot dispute; it is so plain a case that no one can be ignorant on this point. Probably these are the words of the Corinthians, and perhaps they were contained in the letter which was sent to Paul. They would affirm that they were not ignorant in regard to the nature of idols; they were well assured that they were nothing at all; and hence they seemed to infer that it might be right and proper to partake of this food anywhere and everywhere, even in the idol temples themselves. See 1Cor 8:10. To this Paul replies in the course of the chapter, and particularly in 1Cor 8:7.

That we all have knowledge. That is, on this subject; we are acquainted with the true nature of idols, and of idol worship; we all esteem an idol to be nothing, and cannot be in danger of being led into idolatry, or into any improper views in regard to this subject, by participating of the food and feasts connected with idol worship. This is the statement and argument of the Corinthians. To this Paul makes two answers.

(1.) In a parenthesis in 1Cor 8:1-3, to wit, that it was not safe to rely on mere knowledge in such a case, since the effect of mere knowledge was often to puff men up and to make them proud, but that they ought to act rather from "charity," or love; and,

(2.) that though the mass of them might have this knowledge, yet that all did not possess it, and they might be injured, 1Cor 8:7. Having stated this argument of the Corinthians, that all had knowledge, in 1Cor 8:1, Paul then in a parenthesis states the usual effect of knowledge, and shows that it is not a safe guide, 1Cor 8:1-3. In 1Cor 8:4, he resumes the statement (commenced in 1Cor 8:1) of the Corinthians, but which, in a mode quite frequent in his writings, he had broken off by his parenthesis on the subject of knowledge; and in 1Cor 8:4-6, he states the argument more at length--concedes that there was to them but one God, and that the majority of them must know that; but states in 1Cor 8:7, that all had not this knowledge, and that those who had knowledge ought to act so as not to injure those who had not.

Knowledge puffeth up. This is the beginning of the parenthesis. It is the reply of Paul to the statement of the Corinthians, that all had knowledge. The sense is, "Admitting that you all have knowledge; that you know what is the nature of an idol, and of idol worship; yet mere knowledge in this case is not a safe guide; its effect may be to puff up, to fill with pride and self-sufficiency, and to lead you astray. Charity, or love, as well as knowledge, should be allowed to come in as a guide in such cases, and will be a safer guide than mere knowledge." There had been some remarkable proofs of the impropriety of relying on mere knowledge as a guide in religious matters among the Corinthians, and it was well for Paul to remind them of it. These pretenders to uncommon wisdom had given rise to their factions, disputes, and parties, (see chap. i.--iii. ;) and Paul now reminds them that it was not safe to rely on such a guide. And it is no more safe now than it was then. Mere knowledge, or science, when the heart is not right, fills with pride; swells a man with vain self-confidence and reliance in his own powers, and very often leads him entirely astray. Knowledge combined with right feelings, with pure principles, with a heart filled with love to God and men, may be trusted; but not mere intellectual attainments--mere abstract science--the mere cultivation of the intellect. Unless the heart is cultivated with that, the effect of knowledge is to make a man a pedant; to fill him with vain ideas of his own importance; and thus to lead him into error and to sin.

But charity edifieth. Love, (ηαγαπη;) so the word means; and so it would be well to translate it. Our word charity we now apply almost exclusively to alms, giving, or to the favourable opinion which we entertain of others when they seem to be in error or fault. The word in the Scripture means simply love. 1Cor 13:1 and following. The sense here is, "Knowledge is not a safe guide, and should not be trusted. Love to each other and to God, true Christian affection, will be a safer guide than mere knowledge. Your conclusion on this question should not be formed from mere abstract knowledge; but you should ask what LOVE to others--to the peace, purity, happiness, and salvation of your brethren--would demand. If love to them would prompt to this course, and permit you to partake of this food, it should be done; if not, if it would injure them, whatever mere knowledge would dictate, it should not be done." The doctrine is, that love to God and to each other is a better guide in determining what to do than mere knowledge. And it is so. It will prompt us to seek the welfare of others, and to avoid what would injure them. It will make us tender, affectionate, and kind; and will better tell us what to do, and how to do it in the best way, than all the abstract knowledge that is conceivable. The man who is influenced by love, ever pure and ever glowing, is not in much danger of going astray, or of doing injury to the cause of God. The man who relies on his knowledge is heady, high-minded, obstinate, contentious, vexatious, perverse, opinionated; and most of the difficulties in the church arise from such men. Love makes no difficulty, but heals and allays all: mere knowledge heals or allays none, but is often the occasion of most bitter strife and contention. Paul was wise in recommending that the question should be settled by love; and it would be wise if all Christians would follow his instructions.

(a) "unto idols" Acts 15:10,19 (b) "knowledge" Rom 14:14,22 (c) "puffeth" Isa 47:10 (*) "charity" "love" (d) "edifieth" 1Cor 13 Verse 2. And if any man think, etc. The connexion and the scope of this passage require us to understand this as designed to condemn that vain conceit of knowledge, or self-confidence, which would lead us to despise others, or to disregard their interests. "If any one is any one is conceited of his knowledge, is so vain, and proud, and self-confident, that he is led to despise others, and to disregard their true interests, he has not yet learned the very first elements of true knowledge as he ought to learn them. True knowledge will make us humble, modest, and kind to others. It will not puff us up, and it will not lead us to overlook the real happiness of others." See Rom 11:25.

Any thing. Any matter pertaining to science, morals, philosophy, or religion. This is a general maxim pertaining to all pretenders to knowledge.

He knoweth nothing yet, etc. He has not known what is most necessary to be known on tile subject; nor has he known the true use and design of knowledge, which is to edify and promote the happiness of others. If a man has not so learned anything as to make it contribute to the happiness of others, it is a proof that he has never learned the true design of the first elements of knowledge. Paul's design is to induce them to seek the welfare of their brethren. Knowledge, rightly applied, will promote the happiness of all. And it is true now as it was then, that if a man is a miser in knowledge, as in wealth; if he lives to accumulate, never to impart; if he is filled with a vain conceit of his wisdom, and seeks not to benefit others by enlightening their ignorance, and guiding them in the way of truth, he has never learned the true use of science, any more than the man has of wealth who always hoards, never gives. It is valueless unless it is diffused, as the light of heaven would be valueless unless diffused all over the world, and the waters would be valueless if always preserved in lakes and reservoirs, and never diffused over hills and vales to refresh the earth.

(e) "man think" Rom 11:25, Gal 6:3, 1Timm 6:3,4 Verse 3. But if any man love God. If any man is truly attached to God; if he seeks to serve him, and to promote his glory. The sense seems to be this: "There is no true and real knowledge which is not connected with love to God. This will prompt a man also to love his brethren, and will lead him to promote their happiness. A man's course, therefore, is not to be regulated by mere knowledge, but the grand principle is love to God and love to man. Love edifies; love promotes happiness; love will prompt to what is right; and love will secure the approbation of God." Thus explained, this difficult verse accords with the whole scope of the parenthesis, which is to show that a man should not be guided in his intercourse with others by mere knowledge, however great that may be; but that a safer and better principle was love, charity, (αγαπη) whether exercised towards God or man. Under the guidance of this, man would be in little danger of error. Under the direction of mere knowledge, he would never be sure of a safe guide. See 1Cor 13.

The same is known of him. The words "is known," (εγνωσται,) I suppose to be taken here in the sense of "is approved by God; is loved by him; meets with his favour," etc. In this sense the word known is often used in the Scriptures. Mt 7:23. The sense is, "If any man acts under the influence of sacred charity, or love to God, and consequent love to man, he will meet with the approbation of God. He will seek his glory, and the good of his brethren; he will be likely to do right; and God will approve of his intentions and desires, and will regard him as his child. Little distinguished, therefore, as he may be for human knowledge, for that science which puffs up with vain self-confidence, yet he will have a more truly elevated rank, and will meet with the approbation and praise of God. This is of more value than mere knowledge, and this love is a far safer guide than any mere intellectual attainments. So the world would have found it to be if they had acted on it; and so Christians would always find it.

(a) "known of him" Nah 1:7, 2Ti 2:19 Verse 4. As concerning therefore, etc. The parenthesis closes with 1Cor 8:3. The apostle now proceeds to the real question in debate, and repeats in this verse the question, and the admission that all had knowledge. The admission that all had knowledge proceeds through 1Cor 8:4,5,6; and in 1Cor 8:7, he gives the answer to it. In 1Cor 8:4-6, everything is admitted by Paul which they asked in regard to the real extent of their knowledge on this subject; and in 1Cor 8:7 he shows that, even on the ground of this admission, the conclusion would not follow that it was right to partake of the food offered in sacrifice in the temple of an idol.

The eating of those things, etc. Whether it is right to eat them. Here the question is varied somewhat from what it was in 1Cor 8:1, but substantially the same inquiry is stated. The question was, whether it was right for Christians to eat the meat of animals that had been slain in sacrifice to idols.

We know. 1Cor 8:1. We Corinthians know; and Paul seems fully to admit that they had all the knowledge which they claimed, 1Cor 8:7. But his object was to show that even admitting that, it would not follow that it would be right to partake of that meat. It is well to bear in mind, that the object of their statement in regard to knowledge was to show that there could be no impropriety in partaking of the food. This argument the apostle answers in 1Cor 8:7.

That an idol is nothing. Is not the true God; is not a proper object of worship. We are not so stupid as to suppose that the block of wood, or the carved image, or the chiseled marble is a real intelligence, and is conscious and capable of receiving worship, or benefiting its rotaries. We fully admit, and know, that the whole thing is delusive; and there can be no danger that, by partaking of the food offered in sacrifice to them, we should ever be brought to a belief of the stupendous falsehood that they are true objects of worship, or to deny the true God. There is no doubt that the more intelligent heathen had this knowledge; and doubtless nearly all Christians possessed it, though a few who had been educated in the grosser views of heathenism might still have regarded the idol with a superstitious reverence. For whatever might have been the knowledge of statesmen and philosophers on the subject, it was still doubtless true that the great mass of the heathen world did regard the dumb idols as the proper objects of worship, and supposed that they were inhabited by invisible spirits--the gods. For purposes of state, and policy, and imposition, the lawgivers and priests of the pagan world were careful to cherish this delusion. See 1Cor 8:7.

Is nothing. Is delusive; is imaginary. There may have been a reference here to the name of all idol among the Hebrews. They called idols (Elilim,) or, in the singular, , (Elil,) vain, null, nothing-worth, nothingness, vanity, weakness, etc.; indicating their vanity and powerlessness, Lev 26:1, 1Chr 16:26; Isa 2:8,18-20, 10:10, 19:1,3, 31:7, Ps 96:5, Eze 30:13; Hab 2:18; Zech 11:17, etc.

In the world. It is nothing at all; it has no power over the world; no real existence anywhere. There are no such gods as the heathens pretend to worship. There is but one God; and that fact is known to us all. The phrase "in the world" seems to be added by way of emphasis, to show the utter nothingness of idols; to explain in the most emphatic manner the belief that they had no real existence.

And that there is none other God but one. This was a great cardinal truth of religion. Mk 12:29. Comp. De 6:4,5. To keep this great truth in mind was the grand object of the Jewish economy; and this was so plain and important, that the Corinthians supposed that it must be admitted by all. Even though they should partake of the meat that was offered in sacrifice to idols, yet they supposed it was not possible that any of them could forget the great cardinal truth that there was but one God.

(b) "idol" Is 41:24 Verse 5. That are called gods. Gods so called. The heathens everywhere worshipped multitudes, and gave to them the name of gods.

Whether in heaven. Residing in heaven, as a part of the gods were supposed to do. Perhaps there may be allusion here to the sun, moon, and stars; but I rather suppose that reference is made to the celestial deities, or to those who were supposed to reside in heaven, though they were supposed occasionally to visit the earth, as Jupiter, Juno, Mercury, etc.

Or in earth. Upon the earth; or that reigned particularly over the earth, or sea, as Ceres, Neptune, etc. The ancient heathens worshipped some gods that were supposed to dwell in heaven; others that were supposed to reside on earth; and others that presided over the inferior regions, as Pluto, etc.

As there be gods many, (ωσπερ,) etc. As there are, in fact, many which are so called or regarded. It is a fact that the heathens worship many whom they esteem to be gods, or whom they regard as such. This cannot be an admission of Paul that they were truly gods, and ought to be worshipped; but it is a declaration that they esteemed them to be such, or that a large number of imaginary beings were thus adored. The emphasis should be placed on the word many; and the design of the parenthesis is to show that the number of these that were worshipped was not a few, but was immense; and that they were in fact worshipped as gods, and allowed to have the influence over their minds and lives which they would have if they were real; that is, that the effect of this popular belief was to produce just as much fear, alarm, superstition, and corruption, as though these imaginary gods had a real existence. So that though the more intelligent of the heathen put no confidence in them, yet the effect on the great mass was the same as if they had had a real existence, and exerted over them a real control.

And lords many, (κυριοιπολλοι) Those who had a rule over them; to whom they submitted themselves; and whose laws they obeyed. This name lord was often given to their idol gods. Thus among the nations of Canaan their idols were called , (Baal, or lord,) the tutelary god of the Phenicians and Syrians, Jud 8:33, 9:4,46. It is used here with reference to the idols, and means that the laws which they were supposed to give in regard to their worship had control over the minds of their worshippers.

(d) "are called gods" Jn 10:34,35 Verse 6. But to us. Christians. We acknowledge but one God. Whatever the heathen worship, we know that there is but one God; and he alone has a right to rule over us.

One God, the Father. Whom we acknowledge as the Father of all; Author of all things; and who sustains to all his works the relation of a father. The word "Father" here is not used as applicable to the first person of the Trinity, as distinguished from the second, but is applied to God as God; not as the Father in contradistinction from the Son, but to the Divine nature as such, without reference to that distinction--the Father as distinguished from Ms offspring, the works that owe their origin to him. This is manifest,

(1.) because the apostle does not use the correlative term "Son," when he comes to speak of the "one Lord Jesus Christ;" and,

(2.) because the scope of the passage requires it. The apostle speaks of God, of the Divine nature, the one infinitely holy Being, as sustaining the relation of Father to his creatures. He produced them. He provides for them. He protects them, as a father does his children. He regards their welfare; pities them in their sorrows; sustains them in trial; shows himself to be their friend. The name Father is thus given frequently to God, as applicable to the one God, the Divine Being, Ps 103:13, Jer 31:9, Mal 1:6, 2:10, Mt 6:9, Lk 11:2, etc. In other places it is applied to the first person of the Trinity as distinguished from the second; and in these instances the correlative Son is used, Lk 10:22, 22:42, Jn 1:18, 3:35, 5:19-23,26,30,36, Heb 1:5; 2Pet 1:17, etc.

Of whom. εξου. From whom, as a fountain and source; by whose counsel, plan, and purpose. He is the great source of all; and all depend on him. It was by his purpose and power that all things were formed, and to all he sustains the relation of a Father. The agent in producing all things, however, was the Son, Col 1:16. Jn 1:3.

Are all things. These words evidently refer to the whole work of creation, as deriving their origin from God, Gen 1:1. Everything has thus been formed in accordance with his plan; and all things now depend on him as their Father.

And we. We Christians. We are what we are by him. We owe our existence to him; and by him we have been regenerated and saved. It is owing to his counsel, purpose, agency, that we have an existence; and owing to him that we have the hope of eternal life. The leading idea here is, probably, that to God Christians owe their hopes and happiness.

In him. ειςαυτον; or rather, unto him: that is, we are formed for hun, and should live to his glory. We have been made what we are, as Christians, that we may promote his honour and glory.

And one Lord, etc. One Lord, in contradistinction from the "many lords" whom the heathens worshipped. The word Lord here is used in the sense of proprietor, ruler, governor, or king; and the idea is, that Christians acknowledge subjection to him alone, and not to many sovereigns, as the heathens did. Jesus Christ is the Ruler and Lord of his people. They acknowledge their allegiance to him as their supreme Lawgiver and King. They do not acknowledge subjection to many rulers, whether imaginary gods or men; but receive their laws from him alone. The word "Lord" here does not imply of necessity any inferiority to God; since it is a term which is frequently applied to God himself. The idea in the passage is, that from God, the Father of all, we derive our existence, and all that we have; and that we acknowledge immediate and direct subjection to the Lord Jesus as our Lawgiver and Sovereign. From him Christians receive their laws, and to him they submit their lives. And this idea is so far from supposing inferiority in the Lord Jesus to God, that it rather supposes equality; since a right to give laws to men, to rule their consciences, to direct their religious opinions, and their lives, can appropriately appertain only to one who has equality with God.

By whom, etc. διου. By whose agency; or through whom, as the agent. The word "by" (δι) stands in contradistinction from "of" (εξ) in the former part of the verse; and obviously means, that though "all things" derived their existence from God, as the Fountain and Author, yet it was "by" the agency of the Lord Jesus. This doctrine, that the Son of God was the great agent in the creation of the world, is elsewhere abundantly taught in the Scriptures. Jn 1:3.

Are all things. The universe; for so the phrase ταπαντα, properly means. No words could better express the idea of the universe than these; and the declaration is therefore explicit that the Lord Jesus created all things. Some explain this of the "new creation;" as if Paul had said that all things pertaining to our salvation were from him. But the objections to this interpretation are obvious.

(1.) It is not the natural signification.

(2.) The phrase "all things" naturally denotes the universe.

(3.) The scope of the passage requires us so to understand it. Paul is not speaking of the new creature; but he is speaking of the question whether there is more than one God, one Creator, one Ruler, over the wide universe. The heathen said there was; Christians affirmed that there was not. The scope, therefore, of the passage requires us to understand this of the vast material universe; and the obvious declaration here is, that the Lord Jesus was the Creator of all.

And we. We Christians, (1Pet 1:21;) or, we as men; we have derived our existence "by" (δι) or through him. The expression will apply either to our original creation, or to our hopes of heaven, as being by him; and is equally true respecting both. Probably the idea is, that all that we have, as men and as Christians, our lives and our hopes, are through him, and by his agency.

By him. (διαυτου) By his agency. Paul had said, in respect to God the Father of all, that we were unto (εις) him; he here says that in regard to the Lord Jesus, we are by (δι) him, or by his agency. The sense is, "God is the author, the former of the plan; the source of being and of hope; and we are to live to him: but Jesus is the agent by whom all these things are made, and through whom they are conferred on us." Arians and Socinians have made use of this passage to prove that the Son was inferior to God; and the argument is, that the name God is not given to Jesus, but another name implying inferiority; and that the design of Paul was to make a distinction between God and the Lord Jesus. It is not the design of these Notes to examine opinions in theology; but in reply to this argument we may observe briefly,

(1.) that those who hold to the divinity of the Lord Jesus do not deny that there is a distinction between him and the Father: they fully admit and maintain it, both in regard to his eternal existence, (i.e., that there is an eternal distinction of persons in the Godhead,) and in regard to his office as Mediator.

(2.) The term "Lord," given here, does not of necessity suppose that he is inferior to God.

(3.) The design of the passage supposes that there was equality in some respects. God the Father and the Lord Jesus sustain relations to men that in some sense correspond to the "many gods" and the "many lords" that the heathen adored; but they were equal in nature.

(4.) The work of creation is expressly in this passage ascribed to the Lord Jesus. But the work of creation cannot be performed by a creature. There can be no delegated God, and no delegated omnipotence, or delegated infinite wisdom and omnipresence. The work of creation implies divinity; or it is impossible to prove that there is a God: and if the Lord Jesus made "ALL THINGS," he must be God.

(a) "to us" Mal 2:10, Eph 4:6 (1) "we in him" "for" (b) "by whom" Jn 1:3, Heb 1:2 Verse 7. Howbeit. But. In the previous verses Paul had stated the argument of the Corinthians--that they all knew that an idol was nothing; that they worshipped but one God; and that there could be no danger of their falling into idolatry, even should they partake of the meat offered in sacrifice to idols. Here he replies, that though this might be generally true, yet it was not universally; for that some were ignorant on this subject, and supposed that an idol had a real existence, and that to partake of that meat would be to confirm them in their superstition. The inference therefore is, that on their account they should abstain. See 1Cor 8:11-13.

There is not, etc. There are some who are weak and ignorant; who have still remains of heathen opinions and superstitious feelings.

That knowledge. That there is but one God; and that an idol is nothing.

For some, with conscience of the idol. From conscientious regard to the idol; believing that an idol god has a real existence; and that his favour should be sought, and his wrath be deprecated. It is not to be supposed that converted men would regard idols as the only God; but they might suppose that they were intermediate beings, good or bad angels, and that it was proper to seek their favour or avert their wrath. We are to bear in mind that the heathen were exceedingly ignorant; and that their former notions and superstitious feelings about the gods whom their fathers worshipped, and whom they had adored, would not soon leave them, even on their conversion to Christianity. This is just one instance, like thousands, in which former erroneous opinions, prejudices, or superstitious views may influence those who are truly converted to God, and greatly mar and disfigure the beauty and symmetry of their religious character.

Eat it aa a thing, etc. As offered to an idol who was entitled to adoration; or as having a right to their homage. They supposed that some invisible spirit was present with the idol; and that his favour should be sought, or his wrath averted, by sacrifice.

And their conscience being weak. Being unenlightened on this subject; and being too weak to withstand the temptation in such a case. Not having a conscience sufficiently clear and strong to enable them to resist the temptation; to overcome all their former prejudices and superstitious feelings; and to act in an independent manner, as if an idol were nothing. Or their conscience was morbidly sensitive and delicate on this subject: they might be disposed to do right, and yet not have sufficient knowledge to convince them that an idol was nothing, and that they ought not to regard it.

Is defiled. Polluted; contaminated. By thus countenancing idolatry he is led into sin, and contracts guilt that will give him pain when his conscience becomes more enlightened, 1Cor 8:11,13. From superstitious reverence of the idol, he might think that he was doing right; but the effect would be to lead him to a conformity to idol worship that would defile his conscience, pollute his mind, and ultimately produce the deep and painful conviction of guilt. The general reply, therefore, of Paul to the first argument in favour of partaking of the meat offered in sacrifice to idols is, that all Christians have not full knowledge on the subject; and that to partake of that might lead them into the sin of idolatry, and corrupt and destroy their souls. Verse 8. But meat commendeth us not to God. This is to be regarded as the view presented by the Corinthian Christians, or by the advocates for partaking of the meat offered in sacrifice to idols. The sense is, "Religion is of a deeper and more spiritual nature than a mere regard to circumstances like these, God looks at the heart. He regards the motives, the thoughts, the moral actions of men, The mere circumstance of eating meat, or abstaining from it, cannot make a man better or worse in the sight of a holy God. The acceptable worship of God is not placed in such things. It is more spiritual; more deep; more important. And therefore, the inference is, "it cannot be a matter of much importance whether a man eats the meat offered in sacrifice to idols, or abstains." To this argument the apostle replies, (1Cor 8:9-13,) that, although this might be true in itself, yet it might be the occasion of leading others into sin, and it would then become a matter of great importance in the sight of God, and should be in the sight of all true Christians. The word "commendeth" (παριστησι) means, properly, to introduce to the favour of any one, as a king or ruler; and here means to recommend to the favour of God. God does not regard this as a matter of importance. He does not make his favour depend on unimportant circumstances like this.

Neither if we eat. If we partake of the meat offered to idols.

Are we the better. Margin, Have we the more. Gr., Do we abound, (περισσευομεν;) that is, in moral worth or excellence of character. Rom 14:17.

Are we the worse. Margin, Have we the less. Greek, Do we lack or want, (υστερουμεθα;) that is, in moral worth or excellence.

(a) "meat commendeth" Rom 14:17 (1) "we eat" "have we the more" (2) "we eat not" "have we the less" Verse 9. But take heed. This is the reply of Paul to the argument of the Corinthians in 1Cor 8:8. "Though all that you say should be admitted to be true, as it must be; though a man is neither morally better nor worse for partaking of meat or abstaining from it; yet the grand principle to be observed is, so to act as not to injure your brethren. Though you may be no better or worse for eating or not eating, yet, if your conduct shall injure others, and lead them into sin, that is a sufficient guide to determine you what to do in the case. You should abstain entirely. It is of far more importance that your brother should not be led into sin, than it is that you should partake of meat which you acknowledge (1Cor 8:8) is in itself of no importance."

Lest by any means. μηπως. You should be careful that by no conduct of yours your brother be led into sin. This is a general principle that is to regulate Christian conduct in all matters that are in themselves indifferent.

This liberty of your's. This which you claim as a right; this power which you have, and the exercise of which is in itself lawful. The liberty or power (εξουσια) here referred to was that of partaking of the meat that was offered in sacrifice to idols, 1Cor 8:8. A man may have a right abstractedly to do a thing, but it may not be prudent or wise to exercise it.

Become a stumbling-block. An occasion of sin. Mt 5:29, also, Rom 14:13. See that it be not the occasion of leading others to sin, and to abandon their Christian profession, 1Cor 8:10.

To them that are weak. To those professing Christians who are not fully informed or instructed in regard to the true nature of idolatry, and who still may have a superstitious regard for the gods whom their fathers worshipped.

(3) "this liberty" "power" (b) "liberty" Rom 14:13,20, Gall 5:13 Verse 10. For if any man. Any Christian brother who is ignorant, or any one who might otherwise become a Christian.

Which hast knowledge. Who are fully informed in regard to the real nature of idol worship. You will be looked up to as an example. You will be presumed to be partaking of this feast in honour of the idol. You will thus encourage him, and he will partake of it with a conscientious regard to the idol.

Sit at meat. Sitting down to an entertainment in the temple of the idol. Feasts were often celebrated, as they are now among the heathen, in honour of idols. Those entertainments were either in the temple of the idol, or at the house of him who gave it.

Shall not the conscience of him which is weak. Of the man who is not fully informed, or who still regards the idol with superstitious feelings. See 1Cor 8:7.

Be emboldened. Margin, Edified. οικοδομηθησεται. Confirmed; established. So the word edify is commonly used in the New Testament, Acts 9:31, Rom 14:19, Eph 4:12, 1Thes 5:11. The sense here is, "Before this he had a superstitious regard for idols. He had the remains of his former feelings and opinions. But he was not established in the belief that an idol was anything; and his superstitious feelings were fast giving way to the better Christian doctrine that they were nothing. But now, by your example, he will be fully confirmed in the belief that an idol is to be regarded with respect and homage. He will see you in the very temple, partaking of a feast in honour of the idol; and he will infer not only that it is right, but that it is a matter of conscience with you, and will follow your example."

(4) "be emboldened" "edified" Verse 11. And through thy knowledge. Because you knew that an idol was nothing, and that there could be really no danger of falling into idolatry from partaking of these entertainments. You will thus be the means of deceiving and destroying him. The argument of the apostle here is, that if this was to be the result, the duty of those who had this knowledge was plain.

Shall the weak brother. The uninformed and ignorant Christian. That it means a real Christian there can be no doubt. For,

(1.) it is the usual term by which Christians are designated--the endearing name of brother; and,

(2.) the scope of the passage requires it so to be understood. Rom 14:20.

Perish. Be destroyed; ruined; lost. Jn 10:28. So the word απολειται properly and usually signifies. The sense is, that the tendency of this course would be, to lead the weak brother into sin, to apostasy, and to ruin. But this does not prove that any who were truly converted should apostatize and be lost; for,

(1.) there may be a tendency to a thing, and yet that thing may never happen. It may be arrested, and the event not occur.

(2.) The warning designed to prevent it may be effectual, and be the means of saving. A man in a canoe floating down the Niagara river may have a tendency to go over the falls; but he may be hailed from the shore, and the hailing may be effectual, and he may be saved. The call to him was designed to save him, and actually had that effect. So it may be in the warnings to Christians.

(3.) The apostle does not say that any true Christian would be lost. He puts a question; and affirms that if one thing was done, another might follow. But this is not affirming that any one would be lost. So I might say, that if the man continued to float on towards the falls of Niagara, he would be destroyed. If one thing was done, the other would be a consequence. But this would be very different from a statement that a man had actually gone over the falls, and been lost.

(4.) It is elsewhere abundantly proved, that no one who has been truly converted will apostatize and be destroyed. Jn 10:28. Comp. Rom 8:29, Rom 8:30.

For whom Christ died? This is urged as an argument why we should not do anything that would tend to destroy the souls of men. And no stronger argument could be used. The argument is, that we should not do anything that would tend to frustrate the work of Christ, that would render the shedding of his blood vain. The possibility of doing this is urged; and that bare possibility should deter us from a course of conduct that might have this tendency. It is an appeal drawn from the deep and tender love, the sufferings, and the dying groans of the Son of God. If he endured so much to save the soul, assuredly we should not pursue a course that would tend to destroy it. If he denied himself so much to redeem, we should not, assuredly, be so fond of self-gratification as to be unwilling to abandon anything that would tend to destroy. Verse 12. But when ye sin so against the brethren. This is designed further to show the evil of causing others to sin; and hence the evil which might arise from partaking of the meat offered to idols. The word sin here is to be taken in the sense of injuring, offending, leading into sin. You violate the law which requires you to love your brethren, and to seek their welfare, and thus you sin against them. Sin is properly against God; but there may be a course of injury pursued against men, or doing them injustice or wrong, and this is sin against them. Christians are bound to do right towards all.

And wound their weak conscience. The word wound here (τυπτοντες, smiting, beating) is taken in the sense of injure. Their consciences are ill-informed. They have not the knowledge which you have. And by your conduct they are led farther into error, and believe that the idol is something, and is to be honoured. They are thus led into sin, and their conscience is more and more perverted, and oppressed more and more with a sense of guilt.

Ye sin against Christ. Because,

(1.) Christ has commanded you to love them, and seek their good, and not to lead them into sin; and,

(2.) because they are so intimately united to Christ, Jn 15:1, etc., that to offend them is to offend him; to injure the members is to injure the Head; to destroy their souls is to pain his heart and to injure his cause. Mt 10:40. Comp. Lk 10:16.

(a) "But when" Mt 25:40,45 Verse 13. Wherefore. As the conclusion of the whole matter.

If meat, etc. Paul here proposes his own views and feelings, or tells them how he would act, in order to show them how they should act in these circumstances.

Make my brother to offend. Lead him into sin; or shall be the cause of leading him into error and guilt. It does not mean, if the eating of meat should enrage or irritate another; but if it is the occasion of his being led into transgression. How this might be done is stated in 1Cor 8:10.

I will eat no flesh, etc. My eating meat is a matter of comparative unimportance. I can dispense with it. It is of much less importance to me than happiness, a good conscience, and salvation are to my brother. And the law of love therefore to him, requires me to deny myself rather than to be the occasion of leading him into sin. This is a noble resolution; and marks a great, disinterested, and magnanimous spirit. It is a spirit that seeks the good of all; that can deny itself; that is supremely anxious for the glory of God and the salvation of man, and that can make personal comfort and gratification subservient to the good of others. It was the principle on which Paul always acted; and is the very spirit of the self-denying Son of God.

While the world standeth. Greek, For ever. The phrase, "I will never eat meat," would express the idea.

Lest I make, etc. Rather than lead him into sin, by my indulging in eating the meat offered in sacrifice to idols.

(b) "lest" 1Cor 9:22 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- REMARKS on 1st Corinthians Chapter 8

This chapter is very important, as it settles some principles in regard to the conduct of Christians; and shows how they should act in reference to things that are indifferent; or which in themselves can be considered as neither right nor wrong; and in reference to those things which may be considered in themselves as right and lawful, but whose indulgence might injure others. And from the chapter we learn:

(1.) That Christians, though they are truly converted, yet may have many erroneous views and feelings in reference to many things, 1Cor 8:6. This was true of those converted from ancient heathenism, and it is true of those who are now converted from heathenism, and of all young converts. Former opinions, and prejudices, and even superstitions, abide long in the mind, and cast a long and withering influence over the regions of Christian piety. The morning dawn is at first very obscure. The change from night to daybreak is at first scarcely perceptible. And so it may be in conversion. The views which a heathen entertained from his childhood could not at once be removed. The influence of corrupt opinions and feelings, which a sinner has long indulged, may travel over in his conversion, and may long endanger his piety and destroy his peace. Corrupt and infidel thoughts, associations of pollution, cannot be destroyed at once; and we are not to expect from a child in the Christian life, the full vigour, and the elevated principle, and the strength to resist temptation, which we expect of the man matured in the service of the Lord Jesus. This should lead us to charity in regard to the imperfections and failings of young converts; to a willingness to aid and counsel them; to carefulness not to lead them into sin; and it should lead us not to expect the same amount of piety, zeal, and purity in converts from degraded heathens, which we expect in Christian lands, and where converts have been trained up under all the advantages of Sabbath-schools and Bible-classes.

(2.) Our opinions should be formed, and our treatment of others regulated, not by abstract knowledge, but by love, 1Cor 8:1. A man is usually much more likely to act right who is influenced by charity and love, than one who is guided by simple knowledge, or by self-confidence. One is humble, kind, tender towards the frailties of others, sensible himself of infirmity, and is disposed to do right; the other may be vain, harsh, censorious, unkind, and severe. Knowledge is useful; but for the practical purposes of life, in an erring and fallen world, love is more useful; and while the one often leads astray, the other seldom errs. Whatever knowledge we may have, we should make it a point from which we are never to depart, that our opinions of others, and our treatment of them, should be formed under the influence of love.

(3.) We should not be self-confident of our wisdom, 1Cor 8:2. Religion produces humility. Mere knowledge may fill the heart with pride and vanity. True knowledge is not inconsistent with humility; but it must be joined with a heart that is right. The men that have been most eminent in knowledge have also been distinguished for humility; but the heart was right, and they saw the folly of depending on mere knowledge.

(4.) There is but one God, 1Cor 8:4-6. This great truth lies at the foundation of all true religion; and yet is so simple that it may be known by all Christians, however humble, and is to be presumed to be known by all. But though simple, it is a great and glorious truth. To keep this before the minds of men, was one great purpose of all God's revelations; and to communicate it to men is now the grand object of all missionary enterprises. The world is full of idols and idolaters; but the knowledge of this simple truth would change the moral aspect of the entire globe. To spread this truth should be the great aim and purpose of all true Christians; and when this truth is spread, the idols of the heathen will fall to the dust.

(5.) Christians acknowledge one and only one Lord, 1Cor 8:6. He rules over them. His laws bind them. He controls them. He has a right to them. He can dispose of them as he pleases. They are not their own; but are bound to live entirely to him, and for the promotion of his cause.

(6.) It becomes Christians to exercise continual care, lest their conduct, even in things which are in themselves lawful, should be the occasion of leading others into sin, 1Cor 8:9. Christians very often pursue a course of conduct which may not be in itself unlawful but which may lead others who have not their intelligence, or strength of principle, into error. One man may be safe where another man is in danger. One man may be able to resist temptations which would entirely overcome another. A course of life may, perhaps, be safe for a man of years and of mature judgment, which would be ruinous to a young man. And the grand principle here should be, not to do that, even though it may be lawful itself, which would, be the occasion of leading others into sin.

(7.) We see here the importance and the power of example, 1Cor 8:10,11. Nothing is of more value than a correct Christian example. And this applies particularly to those who are in the more elevated ranks of life; who occupy stations of importance; who are at the head of families, colleges, and schools. The ignorant will be likely to follow the example of the learned; the poor of the rich; those in humble life will imitate the manners of the great. Even in things, therefore, which may not be in themselves unlawful in these circumstances, they should set an example of self-denial, of plainness, of abstinence, for the sake of those beneath them. They should so live that it would be safe and right for all to imitate their example, Christ, though he was rich, yet so lived that all may safely imitate him, though he was honoured of God, and exalted to the highest office as the Redeemer of the world, yet he lived so that all in every rank may follow him; though he had all power, and was worshipped by angels, yet so lived that he might teach the most humble and lowly how to live; and so lived that it is safe and proper for all to live as he did. So should every monarch, and prince, and rich man; every noble, and every learned man; every man of honour and office; every master of a family, and every man of age and wisdom, live that all others may learn of them how to live, and that they may safely walk in their footsteps.

(8.) We have here a noble instance of the principles on which Paul was willing to act, 1Cor 8:13. He was willing to deny himself of any gratification, if his conduct was likely to be the occasion of leading others into sin. Even from that which was in itself lawful he would abstain for ever, if by indulgence he would be the occasion of another's falling into transgression. But how rare is this virtue! How seldom is it practised! How few Christians and Christian ministers are there who deny themselves any gratification in things in themselves right, lest they should induce others to sin. And yet this is the grand principle of Christianity; and this should influence and guide all the professed friends and followers of Christ. This principle might be applied to many things in which many Christians now freely indulge; and, if applied, would produce great and important changes in society.

1st. Entertainments and feasts which, perhaps, you may be able to afford, (that is, afford in the supposition that what you have is yours, and not the Lord's,) may lead many of those who cannot afford it to imitate you, and to involve themselves in debt, in extravagance, in ruin.

2nd. You might possibly be safe at a festival, at a public dinner, or in a large party; but your example would encourage others where they would not be safe; and yet, how could you reply should they say that you were there, and that they were encouraged by you?

3rd. On the supposition that the use of wine and other fermented liquors may be in themselves lawful, and that you might be safe in using them, yet others may be led by your example to an improper use of them, or contract a taste for stimulating drinks that may end in their ruin. Would it be right for you to continue the use of wine in such circumstances? Would Paul have done it? Would he not have adopted the noble principle in this chapter, that he would not touch it while the world stands, if it led him to sin?

4th. You might be safe in a party of amusement, in the circle of the gay, and in scenes of merriment and mirth. I say you might be, though the supposition is scarcely possible that Christian piety is ever safe in such scenes, and though it is certain that Paul or the Saviour would not have been found there. But how will it be for the young, and for those of less strength of Christian virtue? Will they be safe there? Will they be able to guard against these allurements as you could? Will they not be led into the love of gaiety, vanity, and folly? And what would Paul have done in such cases? What would Jesus Christ have done? What should Christians now do? This single principle, if fairly applied, would go far to change the aspect of the Christian world. If all Christians had Paul's delicate sensibilities, and Paul's strength of Christian virtue, and Paul's willingness to deny himself to benefit others, the aspect of the Christian world would soon change. How many practices, now freely indulged in, would be abandoned! And how soon would every Christian be seen to set such an example that all others could safely follow it!