Luke Timothy Johnson begins his chapter on The Corinthian Correspondence by saying, “We find [in 1 & 2 Corinthians] a portrait of a community whose life together was a mixture of confusion, pettiness, and ambition, combined with enthusiasm and fervor. The community struggled to define its identity as the church of God in a complex and sophisticated urban setting…The Corinthians were the first to face the problems that have proved to be perennial for all Christian communities: how to live in holiness and freedom within the very real structures of a given social world.”

Paul established the Christian community in Corinth as part of his missionary work. He came to Corinth from Athens and worked with Aquila and Priscilla. He spent his first months in Corinth preaching at the synagogue and converted Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue.  When Paul leaves, Apollos follows, and does good work in the Corinthian churches. The Christians in Corinth come from both Jewish and gentile backgrounds. They were also diverse in their socio-economic status.

The Corinthians were over-enthusiastic and were fascinated with the power from the Spirit. Johnson writes that, “a form of spiritual elitism infected the community…They collapsed the delicate tension between the ‘already’ and the ‘not yet’ by regarding themselves as already rich and ruling in God’s kingdom.”

The spiritual elitism led to the fracturing of community and created splinter groups. Johnson writes, “The Corinthians tended to define themselves by their differences rather than by their common life.”

First and Second Corinthians are not the only letters Paul writes to the Corinthians. Paul alludes to other letters he writes to them and they write to him. In 1 Corinthians 7:1, for example, Paul mentions a letter they wrote him with a list of their questions.

The Christians in Corinth are not of one mind, as is evident in Paul’s letter, but even in the choice to write to Paul to get his advice.  Paul founded the church,  but some Corinthians would rather rely on Peter’s advice, as he was a disciple of Jesus, or Apollos, who apparently was a powerful preacher. But some people in Corinth did write to Paul.  He spends time in 1 Corinthians “reestablishing his credibility as father of this community” and then moving on to address the divisions in the community.

We have here the common structure of Paul’s letters: salutation, thanksgiving, and then the body of the letter. He usually ends his letters with an appeal, in 1 Corinthians it’s to give money to the collection Paul is taking up for Christians in Jerusalem. Then he ends with greetings and a grace.

The first appeal comes in Chapter 1, verses 10-17, to have no division among them. Paul calls the Corinthians siblings, or adelphoi, in Greek. He uses this word thirty-eight times in this letter, twice as many as any other letter in the Bible. J. Paul Sampley writes, “its frequency is a subtle testimony to Paul’s eagerness to affirm the common, shared ground and the equal standing of all God’s children, not only in their relation to Paul but especially to one another.”

We don’t know much about Chloe except that she had enough standing in the community to have ‘people.’ This group, Chole’s people, are how Paul comes to know about the ways the Corinthians have become divisive.

Paul understands his calling as evangelizing, not baptizing.

In this section Paul sets up an either/or situation.  Sampley writes, “Paul sets up rival symbols of the way persons understand and live their lives: ‘Eloquent wisdom,’ pleasant and persuasive as it may be, comes to epitomize culturally accepted connections, associations with important persons or groups as a way of establishing one’s own significance, importance, and worth; ‘cross,’ Paul’s opposing symbol, demolishes all pretensions to status and standing in the world. He writes the Corinthians about his own choice not ‘to empty the cross of Christ,’ and for the first in a long series of instances in this letter, sets himself up as a model to be emulated.” The divisions in this church risk emptying the cross, making its power null and void.

The chapter ends with the words that God’s foolishness is wiser than human wisdom.  This can be misunderstood and might inspire us to reject or not seek wisdom. Rather, as Sampley writes, “At stake is the temptation for us to confuse redemption as coming from possessing the right wisdom, of mistaking salvation for thinking the proper way or having the right ideas. That is the wisdom of the world…what counts is not what one knows but by whom one is known.”

Verses 1-5 look back on Paul’s first encounters with the Corinthians. He highlights his lack of eloquence, his fear, and weakness. Because of this, the source of the Corinthians’ faith is the Spirit, not Paul’s status or ability.  Sampley writes, “Paul’s humility is exemplary. He who could have lorded it over the Corinthians, he who could have emphasized his role in bringing the gospel as a legitimization for his own status and authority over them, instead denigrates his own importance. He is what he is describing. In this passage he portrays himself as having embodied the Christ-centered life in his inauguration of the gospel in Corinth.”

Chapter 2 concludes with more wisdom talk.  Whereas in Chapter 1 it was human wisdom vs. God’s wisdom, in Chapter 2 we have God’s secret and hidden wisdom verses wisdom of this age, of this age’s rulers, and of unspiritual persons.

Paul idealizes the “spiritual person.” The other option is the worldly “wise person” or “unspiritual person” who does not receive or accept the things of the Spirit. Sampley writes, “Verse 6 opens with an invitation for Paul’s hearers to include themselves among the mature, the spiritual people, who can receive Paul’s not-of-this-age wisdom, and closes by giving them the opportunity to identify themselves with the spiritual person who understands. It even adds the extraordinary claim, ‘we have the mind of Christ.’”  This is an idealized version of where the Corinthians ought to be in their faith/relationship with God as we’ll see in chapter 3.

What’s the deal with those who are perishing vs. those who are being saved? Sampley writes that Paul invites the hearers of the letter to identify with the ‘spiritual people.” “On one side is the wisdom of this present age and its rulers, who are said, literally, to be passing away. Like the ‘unspiritual people’ mentioned in 2:14, who ‘do not receive the gifts of God’s spirit.’ Those rulers, surely the temporal ones (as possibly also the cosmic powers whose ultimate destiny is expressed in 15:24), did not perceive the secret hidden wisdom of God, so they ‘crucified the Lord of glory.”

When there is an either/or situation presented to us in scripture it can cause a lot of anxiety, wondering which side we are on and how to be part of the “good side.” But Paul has already invited us to see ourselves on the “good side.” And set over and against us the rulers of the world. Sampley writes, “Paul’s letters never use the term ‘Christian.’ What moderns would call a ‘Christian’ Paul calls a ‘spiritual person,’ that is, one who has received the Holy Spirit.  So Paul’s primary definition of the believer is by means of the Spirit; likewise, the reception of the Spirit is for Paul the hallmark of entry into the community.”

In Chapter 2 Paul painted a picture of mature, spiritual people and here in Chapter 3 Paul says, “you are not that!”  You are babies who are not ready for solid food. The thing that makes them not ready is their factionalism. They divide themselves with quarreling and jealousy. They take sides and say, “I am Paul’s” or “I am Apollo’s.”  Paul says, “no! You’re Christ’s!”

Paul moves away from the baby metaphor to a gardening metaphor- Paul and Apollo were like gardeners, but they didn’t make the Corinthians grow.  They cannot make the Corinthians grow.  It is God who gives the growth.

Paul then moves to a building metaphor.  He says, “For we are God’s coworkers, working together; you are God’s field, God’s building.”  He explains how when Paul started the church in Corinth, he laid the foundation and others came along and built on that foundation. He lists building supplies, from most valuable to least (gold to straw).  Sampley writes, “Paul’s concern is not so much with which material from among this inclusive list is used but with the structure one builds. Presumably, one uses whatever materials are at hand; the list seems to suggest that any material will do. Everyone has building materials available to them. The focus is on the structure that one builds with whatever is available. ‘The work of each person,’ what one builds, not one’s chosen material, is what will be tested by judgment’s fire.”

The fire metaphor Paul uses is not a fire that destroys, but a fire that refines.  This is a metaphor used throughout scripture—see Psalm 66, Isaiah 43, Zechariah 13.  We see this in the hymn How Firm a Foundation which says, “When through fiery trials thy pathway shall lie, my grace, all sufficient, shall be thy supply; the flame shall not hurt thee; I only design, thy dross to consume, and thy gold to refine.” A refiner’s fire removes impurities from metals. Have you experienced a refining fire in your life?  If so, what was that like?  Sampley writes, “Paul’s abiding conviction that God is known for grace, for giving new chances for redemption, leads Paul to hold out the hope that salvation may ultimately come even to the one whose work is burned up.”

Paul has specified that the Corinthians are God’s building and he intensifies that by saying they are God’s Temple. The Temple is where the spirit of God was said to dwell on earth. Paul is saying that the Spirit dwells in the Corinthians. Notice that it’s not every person is God’s Temple, but the people together. Paul warns against “destroying God’s temple.”  This is another admonition about not dividing the community with quarrelling, jealousy, and partisanism. Paul reminds the Corinthians, using this Temple metaphor, that they are set-apart, sacred, and holy.

Paul ends the chapter expecting the Corinthians to be self-reflective, not self-deceptive. It may feel like what they are doing is foolish, but remember what Paul said two chapters before, “For the message about the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” Sampley writes, “Believers can keep proper perspective only when they distinguish between what matters and what does not. Paul once again warns against boasting of status gained by association with particular persons.”

Sampley writes that “Chapters 1-4 are an exercise in proportionality, in keeping or regaining proper perspective, and specifically in not overestimating one’s importance or standing. Paul shows the way by illustrating that apostles also must keep perspective: They are really only administrators or assistants at best.” Only God’s judgment counts!

Paul doesn’t want the Corinthians to get “puffed up.” This term will appear again in this letter.  It describes their misplaced zeal.  The basic lesson Paul wants them to learn, the “nothing beyond what is written,” is that no matter who different followers of Christ may be, they are all one in Christ. There is no room for division!

And yet, the Corinthians, the babies, lord over others their perceived honor/favor. Paul takes a creative side-road in his argument and imagines that the Corinthians were kings. He’s sort of saying, “let’s play this out, and see what happens.” Sampley writes, “Over against the Corinthian fiction of ruling and being filled, Paul pictures apostles as condemned to death, as what seems to be a theater of the absurd played out before the world, before angels, and before people…even in these dire circumstances apostles exemplify the gospel by not returning evil for evil; they bless, endure, and conciliate when people treat them in the opposite fashion. In a shift of image, it is as if apostles have become like the discardable, dirty dishwater by which the world is cleansed.”

Paul is pointing out AGAIN that there are some in the Corinthian church who believe that they already share God’s full blessings.  Sampley writes, “The mention of apostles suggests a contrast in that these Corinthian overestimators mistakenly think that they have achieved levels for which apostles have not even dared to reach.”

Paul reminds them of who founded their church—Paul did! Therefore, his is their father in Christ. They have many people who are praying for them, guiding, and teaching them, but Paul claims familial relationship with them. He warns them not to be arrogant.

When have you been arrogant? Or encountered an arrogant person?  How did your arrogance or their arrogance block their understanding, their forgiveness, their love?

Luke Timothy Johnson titles these two chapters “The Holiness of the Church.”

Chloe’s people have written Paul about some issues arising in the church.  Paul responds to them here. Johnson writes, “Since the people have been ‘washed…sanctified…justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God,’ they can no longer live by their former standards. But unless they are to go out of the world altogether—an option Paul does not recommend—they must continue to associate with those who do not share their perceptions. The community must therefore exercise discernment in its internal life…they must judge themselves and the quality of their life together. While they have been evaluating everyone else, they have let slide their own critical awareness of themselves as a community.”

Paul tells the Corinthians that their community is failing because the boundaries between the world and the church collapsed.  The members of the church are suing each other in pagan courts.  There is an incident of incest that no one in the church is dealing with – behavior that “is not found even among gentiles!”

Paul argues that life within the church community should be different from life without. Life within the church community is freedom!  It is the freedom to be united to God through Christ. Paul narrows in on a situation where one practices “sexual immorality” by having sex with a prostitute. Johnson writes, “Sex is not like food (6:13), for it demands a deeper level of human intentionality. Sexual intercourse with a prostitute, therefore, is wrong not because it is physically contaminating but because by it one becomes ‘one flesh’ without the commitment of the spirit, counterfeiting the physical and spiritual exchange that is at the heart of the sexual relationship.”

The Corinthians have a view that they are mature and spiritual grown-ups, when really they are babies. Paul lists the ways they’ve deceived themselves in these chapters. How the barriers between the church and the world have come down.  When the Corinthians do not practice the freedom in Christ they block themselves from the Kingdom of God. If they are focused on what makes them better than others, puffing themselves up, how can they create a community of love and forgiveness for one another?

We are called to deeper, more meaningful relationships that involve our body and spirit. The body is essential to our experience. Johnson writes, “far from regarding physical existence as irrelevant for the spiritual life, Paul gives it a positive function: ‘Glorify God in your body’ (6:20). This can be understood in two ways, which are mutually reinforcing: ‘Glorify God in your individual bodily lives,’ and ‘Glorify God with this body that is your community.’”

Chapter 7 is all about whether or not it is better to be married or unmarried.  Whether or not to get married or remain single. Here Paul answers questions from Chloe’s people.  He starts with their slogan, that they included in their letter, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” Luke Timothy Johnson writes, “He agrees with it at one level, but for reasons other than those of the Corinthians: to express separation by a celibate lifestyle.  Paul’s partial agreement derives from the eschatological perspective he gives to the entire discussion.”

The Corinthians, remember, are trying to distinguish between themselves.  They puff themselves up and make cases for why they are better than the other Corinthians. Every decision and lifestyle choice becomes evidence in their argument for being better than others.  So, Chloe’s people, who wrote Paul the letter with all the questions, must have tried to distinguish themselves from others by choosing celibacy.  Their argument is that celibacy is the right choice, the best choice, the one that gets them closer to God. They are probably annoyed at Paul’s answer which is basically – if you’re married, stay married, if you’re single, stay single.  And his reasoning for this is, that Christ is coming again soon, soon and very soon, so don’t distract yourselves by getting married or getting divorced/separating. Instead, devote yourselves to God. He’s saying, “you’re crowding out the good stuff by concerning yourselves with things that don’t really matter.” This is very clear in verses 18 and 19, “Was anyone at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was anyone at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but obeying the commandments of God is everything.”

The Corinthians want things cut and dry, black and white, but Paul does not give them that.  Johnson writes, “Christians must live as people both engaged with, and detached from worldly structures. They cannot flee from them, but neither can they treat them as though they were permanent or ultimate. They are to live within them ‘as though not,’ a difficult feat for anyone, and particularly for people attracted to simple solutions. But Paul refuses simple answers. He forces his readers to move through a serious reflection on the meaning of sexual existence in the kingdom of God.”

First Paul says that all human beings are called by God, the call is not contingent on their situation – male or female, married or unmarried, slave or free, Jew or Greek. All humans are called to live righteous lives. Therefore, stations in life are not essential and “can be understood as matters of free choice.” Paul does highlight that married people are torn between care for spouse (and children, if any) and service to God, while single people are “free for the service of the whole community.” At the same time, not everyone has the “gift of celibacy” so marriage is valued equally.  Can you see Chloe’s people reading this, annoyed, because they argued that celibacy was superior?

Our modern ears hear this differently than those of the ancient world. Paul says that each man should have his own wife and each woman should have her own husband. Sampley writes, “The Corinthians who formulated the quoted maxim [“It is good for a man not to touch a woman.”] are concerned with men, their rights and practices; Paul is evenhanded about what both men and women should do. Verses 3-4, surely a remarkable passage to modern ears, but perhaps not totally uncommon in Paul’s time, clarify Paul’s distance from their maxim by depicting marriage as a relationship in which husbands and wives have equal standing and equal authority over the body of the other one.”

Celibacy loses its purpose when one is preoccupied with sex. One is not better than another (celibacy and marriage) instead it’s whatever works for the individual, their station, their relationships, and their service to God.

In this chapter Paul says by whose authority he speaks.  When he talks about the prohibition of divorce, he says this is by the Lord’s authority.  Jesus addresses this in Mark 10, Matthew 5 and 19 and Luke 16.  The law of Moses allowed men to divorce their wives, which left them destitute, without protection.  In a patriarchal society prohibiting divorce was a way to care for women, making sure they were not thrown out of their homes for unjust reasons. Meanwhile, when Paul answers questions about marriage between a believer and an unbeliever he speaks on his own authority.

It’s helpful when reading 1 Corinthians to remember who Paul is talking to and the underlying issues he is addressing. 

Paul tells the Corinthians that idols are basically made up.  They are “so-called gods.” Statues that have no power or authority.  There is only one God, the God we serve. So really, it doesn’t matter if you eat food sacrificed to an idol, because idols don’t exist.

Meat was not a regular part of the first-century diet.  The place to find meat was in a meat market attached to a pagan temple. Many of the Christians in Corinth with high social status would attend meals in these places.  Should Christians avoid these places all together? Operate their own meat markets?
 
Paul identifies two groups—the “strong” and the “weak.” Luke Timothy Johnson writes, “Some of the ‘strong’ Corinthians claim that since idols were not real, no harm was done by participation in these purely social contacts. But the ‘weak’ are not convinced that the contacts are innocuous. They see them as collusion in idolatry. Beneath this conflict lies the issue of the legitimacy of plurality in Christian community practice and the relative importance of right knowledge and love. There are four major stages to Paul’s argument: 1. Initial Distinctions, Chapter 8. 2. The Apostolic Example, Chapter 9. 3. The Warning of Torah, 10:1-13. 4. Freedom is for Edification 10:14-11:1.

The first stage of Paul’s argument distinguishes between knowledge that puffs up and love that builds up. Johnson writes, “For Paul, being theoretically correct without community sensitivity is useless. Conceptually, he agrees with ‘the strong’: there is no ultimate power in the world but the one God; idols are nothing but human projections. This knowledge, however is of no value to the one who cannot be convinced of it.” So Paul concludes in verse 13, “if food is a cause of their falling, I will never again eat meat, so that I may not cause one of them to fall..”

In Chapter 9 Paul continues the argument he started in chapter 8. He uses himself as an example to further his argument that the “strong” are technically correct that meat sacrificed to idols is just meat since idols are made up, but that they have a responsibility to the “weak” to not eat meat sacrificed to idols so that “the weak’s” faith is not affected.

He says, basically, “listen, as an apostle I’m entitled to certain things—to be supplied food and drink, a wife as a companion, support for my ministry. But I do not exercise my rights to those things so that there is no obstacle in proclaiming the good news.”

Johnson writes, “His freedom will not become a stumbling block to others. He is an example of power emptied out in service to others. He extends this to being available to all people, ‘that I might by all means save some’ (9:22). He views his ministry as a ‘life for others,’ and therefore their life together should be one of mutual service rather than of competition and dissension.”  This goes back to the overriding problem the Corinthians have, they divide themselves into factions and compete with one another about who is the best. Paul says, instead, focus on mutual service to one another, like I do.

In Chapter 10 Paul continues the argument he started in chapter 8. He compares the Corinthians to the Israelites in the wildness in Exodus and Numbers. The Gentile Christians in Corinth would not have grown up with those wilderness stories, but Paul is telling them that they ought to consider them part of their own sacred stories.

Paul wants the Corinthians to see themselves in the Israelites. Like them, the Corinthians have many gifts and a relationship with God. Johnson writes, “In spite of its great gifts, however, the desert generation was overthrown. Paul says they are a warning: what happened to them is a type of the dangers facing the present Corinthian generation. The stories were written, indeed, to provide examples. Israel fell from God’s favor despite its gifts precisely because it was not faithful to its call; it did not live appropriately to its identity. Those people were idolaters (Exodus 32) and sexually immoral (Numbers 25). They tested the Lord (Numbers 21) and grumbled (Numbers 14). There is a lesson here for both strong and weak.  To ‘the strong’, a warning: let anyone who thinks he stands take warning, lest he fall.’ To ‘the weak’, a consolation: ‘with the temptation [God] will also provide the way of escape.”

Verse 14 beings the final stage of Paul’s argument. Johnson writes, “Those having knowledge are warned to ‘shun the worship of idols’, since they may be involving themselves in ways they cannot anticipate or control. Paul insists that even mere bodily participation can lead to spiritual entanglement.”

Just as we spiritually participate in Holy Communion, eating meat sacrificed to idols makes you participate in something you’re not intending to. Johnson writes, “Idols may not be real, but the spiritual atmosphere of distortion characteristic of idolatry is real and dangerous. Participants in fellowship meals at idol shrines may thus find themselves unwittingly the partner of demons.”

Paul reiterates to the Corinthians that we are given freedom in Christ and that everyone should be governed by one’s own informed judgement. Also, “if the good of a neighbor is involved, one’s freedom is conditioned; ‘let no one seek his own good, but the goof of his neighbor.’ Such service is not a denial of one’s rights, but a self-emptying for the sake of a weak sibling in order to ‘build them up’” (Johnson).

Do everything for the glory of God!

Chapter 11 starts with Paul commending the Corinthians for holding to traditions.  And then Paul says all the ways they do not. Johnson writes, “beginning with one that apparently bothered him emotionally: the way women were prophesying and praying in the assembly…Here, it is not teaching [like in chapter 14, which we’ll get to next week] but the charismatic gifts of prayer and prophecy that are at issue. Paul has no problem with women doing these things; the gifts, after all, come from the Spirit. But the manner of their performance upsets him.”

The problem for us is, we don’t know what Paul was so upset about.  Johnson writes, “The precise nature of their offense is not clear.”  It could be that they didn’t wear veils over their heads or that they unbraided their hair.  Johnson continues, “In Paul’s eyes a fundamental line of social decency has been crossed…Like everybody in his age, he understood social order as intimately connected to cosmic order. As a male in a hierarchically structured society, therefore, he invokes a series of arguments: the cosmic hierarchy of female-male-Christ; the order of creation, with male first and female second; an obscure reference to the angelic role in worship; and Hellenistic social sensitivities. The intrinsic weakness of Paul’s position is indicated by the number of arguments he must invoke and his constant need to qualify them. He does not really believe, for example, that in Christ women are fundamentally subordinate to men. [11:11 he says, “Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man or man independent of woman”]. He is, for once, unable to argue from first principles to social behavior, for the very good reason in this case that the social norm has nothing to do with Christian first principles. It is just a matter of custom and customary perceptions. Paul at least recognizes that this is the only argument left to him: ‘If anyone is disposed to be contentious—we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.’”

Basically, what is happening, is that the way in which the Corinthian women prophesy and pray makes Paul uncomfortable. But there is no scriptural reason for it to make him uncomfortable or what they are doing wrong.  There is no reason what they are doing is incorrect or wrong except that it is not social convention or tradition. Is there anything that you know is okay, is technically fine, but it makes you uncomfortable?  Take a minute to think and pray about what it is that makes you uncomfortable.  Is it social convention? Is it that tradition is not being honored, it’s different than the way it’s always been? Is it something else?
                                                       
We then move to instructions for the Lord’s Supper. Paul has heard of MORE divisions. Are you surprised? We’re not exactly sure what the problem is. Maybe some people are bringing their own food and then eating it all before they get to the ritual that brings everyone together. Or maybe the rich are eating their own dinners that they brought and not sharing with the poor. Or maybe whoever is hosting the dinner hogs all the food for themselves and their friends? Johnson writes, “This much is clear: Paul perceives that the Christian sacred meal is being infiltrated by the attitudes of the world.”

You may recognize verse 23-26 from our communion liturgy.

Johnson writes, “Paul’s main point is clear: when the Corinthians ‘come together as a church’ they do not eat a worldly meal (they can eat that at home), but they enter into a ritual fellowship meal that establishes the community as ‘the body of the Lord.’” The worldly attitudes of self-aggrandizement and rivalry are not only inappropriate, they destroy the church and call down God’s judgment upon the perpetrators.”

coming soon

coming soon

coming soon

coming soon

coming soon