Chapter 1
In 1:1 Paul mentions Sosthenes, earlier mentioned as the one who was beaten before Gallio's tribunal after Gallio said "religious crimes" were none of his affair.
2022 - If the letter is written from Ephesus, as the introduction says, then surely this implies that Sosthenes had traveled there also, either with Paul, or to meet Paul there. Ephesus is quite a ways from Corinth - over 200 miles if you went straight across by ship. Much much further if you walk.
First greeting, then Paul tells them he is thankful for them. Pretty typical of Paul's letters to start off with these two parts. This verse though:
2 To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours: [1Co 1:2 ESV] The body is one, not confined to the local church, but we are united with all believers in all places. Maybe Paul is going to point out that doing things that are out of sync with other churches should be an indication of possible error, and a grave concern. If all are one, there should not be huge differences in theory or practice. There is also this verse, at the very beginning of a book that is going to talk at length about Spiritual gifts:
7 so that you are not lacking in any gift, as you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, [1Co 1:7 ESV]
This church had so many things going wrong, was so "invaded" and hindered by the inclusion of cultural "norms" in their worship, yet all the gifts were present, many were being exercised openly...it was obvious that they were saved, and yet they were so full of error. But Paul never says "You "real" Christians with your hymns and your nice Sunday clothes and your male Sunday School teachers should all go across the road and start a new church, because this one is just too messed up, and it is the majority that is messed up so you're not going to be able to outvote them and make them do it right. So just leave and start over." Paul never suggests splitting off from a terribly imperfect church. Surely there is a lesson in this.
I am sick to death of the ESV footnote, every time Paul says "brothers", that lets me know it could also be translated "brothers and sisters". Surely there is a word in Greek for "and" (kappa alpha iota, kai) plus a word in Greek for "sisters" (adelphen, the feminine form of adelphos). If Paul had wanted to say that, he certainly had vocabulary available to him to do so. That is not what he said. It was the way they did things, nothing exclusionary was meant by it. But it is what he said and it is the way he said it. If you can't deal with this, then there are a ton of things in the Bible that you are going to have even more trouble with. Start with understanding that it is written in the context of that time - 55 AD - and DO NOT try to change what it says! Brothers is what it says! I checked the interlinear. The word is "adelphos" - just the one word. In Greek it is a masculine noun. It is used 346 times in the KJV. Brethren, brother, brother's, brother's way are the only four ways it is translated. Brethren is dominant, and used 226x. While I am fine that the word, depending on context, includes women, it should not and was never meant to be translated "brothers and sisters". It just was not.
And then he really starts:
Paul first addresses division in the church. They are divided, based on who baptized them. Each considers this a badge of some sort, something to wear with pride. The division is over who they "follow". It may be based on who baptized who, but that isn't all of it, because as far as I know neither Peter nor Jesus baptized anyone at Corinth, and Paul says he baptized only a very few people. He is happy that is the case. If baptism completes salvation, there is just no possible way that Paul would ever say something like this. His message is not that he's glad not many were saved by his (baptismal) efforts, but that he is glad he hasn't contributed any more than he has to their divisions. He tells them it doesn't matter to whom they are loyal, that all are in Christ, and that is what Paul preached to them.
2022 - This verse:
10 I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. [1Co 1:10 ESV]. Is this even possible? How can you take a book like the Bible - or in their case, they are trying to make their way without a New Testament at all - and agree on everything that it says? Is this hyperbole on Paul's part? Or is there some other meaning that English misses?
Yes. Looking at BLB, and looking at the individual words and their meanings, the translation seems inadequate. First, how do other Bibles translate it:
10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. [1Co 1:10 KJV]
10 I appeal to you, dear brothers and sisters, by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, to live in harmony with each other. Let there be no divisions in the church. Rather, be of one mind, united in thought and purpose. [1Co 1:10 NLT]
These two are representative of the other "choices" made in translation. I personally think the KJV has the best sense of the words. The words are αὐτὸ λέγητε πάντες. The first word is a pronoun, which is translated "him" 1952 times of the 5785 times it is used in the KJV. It is an indispensible word in Greek conversation. In this verse, ESV translates this "agree". Agree is not even close to being a pronoun! However, 80x in the KJV, the word is translated "same". There are also 1678 times where it means other things, not listed. I didn't look those up. But keep in mind that this is a pronoun in a huge majority of cases where it is used. Next word is a form of legos. Means "word". The legos is the word, used so much in John 1. So we COULD go with "same word", and then that last word is pantes, and means things like all, every, whosoever, whatsoever things like that. So, in "raw" translation we have "same word all", and even there, we are not using the most common form of autos, which is him. That would give us "him word all", which gets us exactly nowhere at all. So this Greek phrase is some kind of idiom or construction that had a meaning that would be understood by Greek speakers in Corinth in 55 AD...but gives us a little bit of pause. Remember that the reason I went to so much trouble here is that "all of you agree" seems like far too much to ask. Looking again, this is a compound sentence. In ESV, it is "that all of you agree" AND "that there be no divisions". So...whatever the first part means, the implication is that you can get the first part right and still have divisions over it. The word for divisions is "schismata". We get schism from that. Seems to carry the sense of a deep, nasty rift. A "split" or "gap". Hmm...so the sense is, get the first part under control and the second part won't be a problem, won't occur. I wish I was fluent in 1st century Greek! Footnote in MSB says that three word phrase is literally "speak the same thing". Also says division is more literally schisms. So. Don't be so far apart in your beliefs that it rips great huge fissures in between those with different ideas. It all comes from scripture. It all comes from God, it all comes from Jesus. There cannot be "schisms" in what God teaches. So "say the same thing", that is, move toward the middle, build bridges over the schisms, and GET ALONG WITH EACH OTHER. Views that are the extreme opposite of each other CANNOT BOTH be right. But...Calvinism and Armenianism? Exactly. Do not be so adamant about one that you cannot have a civil conversation with someone who believes the other. You are both "in Christ", and He is not divided! Ok. Enough on that.
Well...say the same things may mean "debate things amicably". Yeah. That really might be where Paul was going with that. And that is why he never says "change churches". Changing churches, even in the face of the kind of problems Corinth had, is not the solution because that is not how you promote unity. If someone is sick at your house, do you move out? Is that love for someone, to just leave them to wallow in their problems? NO! Leaving the church does not promote unity, it is the very definition of "schism". I do not think Paul means to accept poor doctrine, because he's going to spend a big part 1Cor straightening out errors from a position of authority - the Bible is our authority now as the apostles were back then. So people do get things wrong. But love of our fellow Christians, with the overriding goal of full church unity, ought to create in us a desire to work toward agreement.
There has to be a FB post here...but it would sure be a long one. I just don't see how to condense this paragraph to FB length. It would make a nice essay on my web site. Hmm. I should start a list of those. There was another one not long ago, and I never did it, and now I don't remember it.
This verse:
18 For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. [1Co 1:18 ESV]
This is the supernatural part of salvation. The indwelling of God makes His word, His ways, His purposes more clear to us. The Spirit interprets for us so we can have a fuller understanding of what is written in the Bible. Those who do not believe do not see this, and so think the Bible is "folly". Perhaps one's view of the Bible is a good yardstick by which we can evaluate the spiritual condition of others?
2021 - But that isn't really Paul's point. His point is that the Corinthians are bogged down in perpetual argument over the relative wisdom, power, and merit of the leaders of their church, and they take sides and they resent those who "back" other teachers. The debate is about who is the wisest teacher and they must be reading more and more into this. This is a Greek thing, to debate endlessly about details and call it wisdom. Paul says the gospel is not about seeking wisdom. The gospel is simple, explainable to anyone, graspable by anyone. He says they should be looking to the gospel and spreading the gospel, not constantly comparing the teachings of their leadership.
I think this next verse confirms the 2021 paragraph:
19 For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart." [1Co 1:19 ESV], quoted from Isa 29:14. There, it is about the Millennial, when Christ's wisdom is the only wisdom. God purposely made his word a problem for those who are wise in their own eyes and the ways of the world. They are supposed to have a problem with it.
Paul says wisdom does not lead to salvation. Belief in Christ crucified leads to salvation. This is how God wanted it, so that the wise have no basis for bragging nor can they "lord it over" the simple, dumb and common people around them. Simple faith is all that is required, and the message is spread by preaching. You don't even need to know how to read. Paul points out to them in vs 26 that almost none of them would have qualified for salvation if wisdom was the test, nor if power or noble birth was the standard. None of these are the way, lest some have reason to boast. He quotes "let him that glorieth, glory in this: 24 But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I [am] the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these [things] I delight, saith the LORD. [Jer 9:24 KJV] Our boast is that we know about Jesus, we are in Christ. NOT that we are so very smart.