| |
THE FIRST EPISTLE
OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE
CORINTHIANS
Commentary by A. R.
FAUSSETT
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
INTRODUCTION
The AUTHENTICITY of this Epistle is attested by CLEMENT OF
ROME [First Epistle to the Corinthians, 47],
POLYCARP [Epistle to the Philippians, 11], and IRENÆUS
[Against Heresies, 4.27.3]. The city to which it
was sent was famed for its wealth and commerce, which were
chiefly due to its situation between the Ionian and Ægean
Seas on the isthmus connecting the Peloponese with Greece.
In Paul's time it was the capital of the province Achaia
and the seat of the Roman proconsul (@Ac
18:12). The state of morals in it was notorious for
debauchery, even in the profligate heathen world; so much
so that "to Corinthianize" was a proverbial
phrase for "to play the wanton"; hence arose
dangers to the purity of the Christian Church at Corinth.
That Church was founded by Paul on his first visit (@Ac
18:1-17).
He had been the instrument of converting many Gentiles (@1Co
12:2), and some Jews (@Ac
18:8), notwithstanding the vehement opposition of the
countrymen of the latter (@Ac
18:5), during the year and a half in which he
sojourned there. The converts were chiefly of the humbler
classes (@1Co
1:26, &c.). Crispus (@1Co
1:14 Ac 18:8), Erastus, and Gaius (Caius) were,
however, men of rank (@Ro
16:23). A variety of classes is also implied in @1Co
11:22. The risk of contamination by contact with the
surrounding corruptions, and the temptation to a craving
for Greek philosophy and rhetoric (which Apollos' eloquent
style rather tended to foster, @Ac
18:24, &c.) in contrast to Paul's simple preaching
of Christ crucified (@1Co
2:1, &c.), as well as the opposition of certain
teachers to him, naturally caused him anxiety. Emissaries
from the Judaizers of Palestine boasted of "letters
of commendation" from Jerusalem, the metropolis of
the faith. They did not, it is true, insist on
circumcision in refined Corinth, where the attempt would
have been hopeless, as they did among the simpler people
of Galatia; but they attacked the apostolic authority of
Paul (@1Co
9:1,2 2Co 10:1,7,8), some of them declaring themselves
followers of Cephas, the chief apostle, others boasting
that they belonged to Christ Himself (@1Co
1:12 2Co 10:7), while they haughtily repudiated all
subordinate teaching. Those persons gave out themselves
for apostles (@2Co
11:5,13). The ground taken by them was that Paul was
not one of the Twelve, and not an eye-witness of the
Gospel facts, and durst not prove his apostleship by
claiming sustenance from the Christian Church. Another
section avowed themselves followers of Paul himself, but
did so in a party spirit, exalting the minister rather
than Christ. The followers of Apollos, again, unduly
prized his Alexandrian learning and eloquence, to the
disparagement of the apostle, who studiously avoided any
deviation from Christian simplicity (@1Co
2:1-5). In some of this last philosophizing party
there may have arisen the Antinomian tendency which tried
to defend theoretically their own practical immorality:
hence their denial of the future resurrection, and their
adoption of the Epicurean motto, prevalent in heathen
Corinth, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we
die" (@1Co
15:32). Hence, perhaps, arose their connivance at the
incestuous intercourse kept up by one of the so-called
Christian body with his stepmother during his father's
life. The household of Chloe informed Paul of many other
evils: such as contentions, divisions, and lawsuits
brought against brethren in heathen law courts by
professing Christians; the abuse of their spiritual gifts
into occasions of display and fanaticism; the interruption
of public worship by simultaneous and disorderly
ministrations, and decorum violated by women speaking
unveiled (contrary to Oriental usage), and so usurping the
office of men, and even the holy communion desecrated by
greediness and revelling on the part of the communicants.
Other messengers, also, came from Corinth, consulting him
on the subject of (1) the controversy about meats offered
to idols; (2) the disputes about celibacy and marriage;
(3) the due exercise of spiritual gifts in public worship;
(4) the best mode of making the collection which he had
requested for the saints at Jerusalem (@1Co
16:1, &c.). Such were the circumstances which
called forth the First Epistle to the Corinthians, the
most varied in its topics of all the Epistles.
In @1Co
5:9, "I wrote unto you in an Epistle not to
company with fornicators," it is implied that Paul
had written a previous letter to the Corinthians (now
lost). Probably in it he had also enjoined them to make a
contribution for the poor saints at Jerusalem, whereupon
they seem to have asked directions as to the mode of doing
so, to which he now replies (@1Co
16:2). It also probably announced his intention of
visiting them on way to Macedonia, and again on his return
from Macedonia (@2Co
1:15,16), which purpose he changed hearing the
unfavorable report from Chloe's household (@1Co
16:5-7), for which he was charged with (@2Co
1:17). In the first Epistle which we have, the subject
of fornication is alluded to only in a way, as if he were
rather replying to an excuse set up after rebuke in the
matter, than introducing for the first time [ALFORD].
Preceding this former letter, he seems to have paid a second
visit to Corinth. For in @2Co
12:4 @2Co
13:1, he speaks of his intention of paying them a third
visit, implying he had already twice visited them.
See on 2Co
2:1; 2Co
13:2; also see on 2Co
1:15; 2Co
1:16. It is hardly likely that during his three years'
sojourn at Ephesus he would have failed to revisit his
Corinthian converts, which he could so readily do by sea,
there being constant maritime intercourse between the two
cities. This second visit was probably a short one
(compare @1Co
16:7); and attended with pain and humiliation (@2Co
2:1 12:21), occasioned by the scandalous conduct of so
many of his own converts. His milder censures having then
failed to produce reformation, he wrote briefly directing
them "not to company with fornicators." On their
misapprehending this injunction, he explained it more
fully in the Epistle, the first of the two extant (@1Co
5:9,12). That the second visit is not mentioned in
Acts is no objection to its having really taken place, as
that book is fragmentary and omits other leading incidents
in Paul's life; for example, his visit to Arabia, Syria,
and Cilicia (@Ga
1:17-21).
The PLACE OF WRITING is fixed to be Ephesus (@1Co
16:8). The subscription in English Version,
"From Philippi," has no authority whatever, and
probably arose from a mistaken translation of @1Co
16:5, "For I am passing through
Macedonia." At the time of writing Paul implies (@1Co
16:8) that he intended to leave Ephesus after
Pentecost of that year. He really did leave it
about Pentecost (A.D. 57). Compare @Ac
19:20. The allusion to Passover imagery in connection
with our Christian Passover, Easter (@1Co
5:7), makes it likely that the season was about
Easter. Thus the date of the Epistle is fixed with
tolerable accuracy, about Easter, certainly before
Pentecost, in the third year of his residence at Ephesus,
A.D. 57. For other arguments, see CONYBEARE and HOWSON'S Life
and Epistles of St. Paul.
The Epistle is written in the name of Sosthenes
"[our] brother." BIRKS supposes he is the same
as the Sosthenes, @Ac
18:17, who, he thinks, was converted subsequently to
that occurrence. He bears no part in the Epistle itself,
the apostle in the very next verses (@1Co
1:4, &c.) using the first person: so Timothy is
introduced, @2Co
1:1. The bearers of the Epistle were probably
Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (see the subscription,
@1Co
16:24), whom he mentions (@1Co
16:17,18) as with him then, but who he implies are
about to return back to Corinth; and therefore he commends
them to the regard of the Corinthians.
|
|