# 5: 10-3-14 E

First Corinthians 1:10-17

Paul had opened his letter on a note of thanks - not for the recipients of his letter, in Corinth, but instead, his
thanks to God.
Paul was thankful for Gods faithfulness to the believers in Corinth; that God would assuredly finish the
good work that He had begun in them (Phil 1:6). Having become blameless through the shed blood of
Jesus, the believers in Corinth would remain blameless until the end of their days on earth - until the day
when they met their Lord, face to face in heaven.
Having reflected upon the faithfulness of God, Paul now addresses the church in Corinth - with a plea.
[First Corinthians 1:10-17]
So we see that Paul begins with a plea for unity, to the church in Corinth, because of their divisiveness
(vv. 10-13a). Paul then briefly mentions baptism (vv. 13b-16), which we will discuss; then he begins to
transition to his first main point - the difference between the message of the cross, and worldly wisdom
(v. 17).
Lets start with verse 10.
v. 10-11 What a contrast this is, after Pauls statement of thanksgiving to God! God is faithful to
accomplish His purposes, in the believers in Corinth. They have already been brought into the fellowship of
Gods Son, Jesus - the fellowship of a family, united by love (Col 3:14).
But are these members of the family united? No; theyre divided; and as we see in verse 11, theyre
quarreling; theyre contending with one another.
Paul knows about this divisiveness because some members of the assembly from Corinth happen to be in
Ephesus, and they have informed him about it. Paul does not hesitate to name these members, because it
was right that they should tell him - Paul established that assembly.
Paul simply says that they are of Chloes household. He doesnt give any further details concerning this
woman named Chloe - which makes it certain that the church in Corinth must all know her - a prominent
member of the assembly there, perhaps even the host of one of the home churches.
Chloe and her household were apparently faithful to the apostle Paul, whom the Lord had sent to them, to
share the gospel with them. These may have been her servants, conducting business for her in Ephesus, a
great commercial center in the Roman Empire.
But whatever the case, it was they who communicated to Paul the divisiveness of the assembly in Corinth a situation that was probably not mentioned in the letter that Paul had received from the assembly.
So based on that report, Paul opens with a plea to the brethren - the believers - in Corinth. Notice exactly
what Paul is beseeching them to do - a request he makes in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, the One who
brought them into Gods family. Paul pleads that they all speak the same thing; that they be joined together,
as a family should be, in mind and in judgment - meaning will, or opinion, here. Paul is calling them to be
in agreement.

# 5: 10-3-14 E

But is Paul only asking that they agree - just choose a single way to think, whatever way? Of course not.
Paul wants them to agree with God; to have His thinking on things, and then they will be in agreement with
one another.
The same mind that Paul is asking them to have is the mind of Christ (1 Cor 2:16). And as that mind
directs their words and even their opinions, they will dwell with one another in unity (Ps 133:1).
Now, if Paul has to say this to them - and we see that he does, and even begins his real address to them,
with it - what does that tell you? That they have different minds on things. These different ways of
thinking must not be the mind of Christ, then, right? And thinking that is not His must be worldly thinking.
Theres a lot of different thinking out there, in the world, isnt there? And that was true in Pauls day, as
well. Being residents of Corinth, the readily available thinking was various Greek philosophies. There
were many different philosophies, because man came up with many theories to explain how things are.
And men would pick and choose among the theories, and come up with their own unique spin on things.
But with the different philosophies came differences of opinions - and disputes about whose opinion was
right. So it was this other thinking - worldly thinking - that was causing division, in the church in
Corinth.
But Paul had just said before in this letter that God had graced the believers in Corinth with all utterance
and all knowledge. How did God grace them, with these things? Through the Holy Spirit.
When they became members of the Body of Christ, they received these spiritual enablements - so much so
that they came short in no gift (vv. 4-7). They had the ability to utter what God shared with them to one
another, so that they all spoke the same thing - the truth. And they had the ability to know all the truth they
needed to know, so that they could have the same mind on things, which would enable them to agree, as an
assembly.
But by Pauls words, we see that theyre not doing that. Whats the problem? They are. God has done His
part, making rich provision for the believers in Corinth - but what we see is that theyre not doing their part,
to live by that rich provision.
Instead, theyre choosing to take in the impoverished thinking of this world - a diet that does nothing to
nourish the new life that they have, in Christ - nor to nurture the unity they should have, as members of
Christs Body.
As Paul continues, he will indicate more specifically what has caused him to make this plea for unity. But
before we can go further, we need to identify two of the four individuals Paul names, in verse 12.
Cephas is the Hellenized Aramaic name for Peter. This is almost certainly the apostle Peter, and in that
Paul names him without any further qualification, we can assume the Corinthians knew him. This makes it
possible that Peter taught in Corinth, at some time after Paul was there.
For the other individual, Apollos, we need to refer to the account, in Acts. Turn to Acts chapter 18. This
episode took place some time after Paul had departed from Corinth, but before he came to Ephesus on his
third missionary journey.

# 5: 10-3-14 E

v. 24-25 Apollos, being born in Alexandria, Egypt, was a Hellenist Jew; a Jew who grew up within the
Greek world, with its culture and language. In that day, Alexandria was the center of the Greco-Roman
world for learning. The city also had a large Jewish population; in fact, the Hebrew Scriptures were
translated there by scholars into the Greek language - whats called the Septuagint.
Luke describes Apollos as an eloquent man; this means that he was a learned man; Greek-educated, and
therefore formally skilled in rhetoric. In addition to that, Apollos was mighty in the Scriptures; he had a
comprehensive knowledge of the OT.
But Apollos didnt just have knowledge of God; he was able to share that knowledge accurately and
effectively, and it was his great desire to share it; he was fervent in spirit.
And the knowledge of Apollos was not just great, but deep; he had been instructed in the way of the Lord that is, the Coming One; the Messiah. There was just one thing missing.
When Luke writes that Apollos knew only the baptism of John, he is indicating that this was as much as
Apollos knew. Apollos had heard that John came, baptizing with a baptism of repentance; a preparation of
heart for the coming of the King - Israels Messiah. But thats as much as Apollos had heard; he never
heard that the Messiah had actually come. This becomes clear as the text continues.
So Apollos came to Ephesus.
v. 26 You may remember that Paul had left Aquila and Priscilla in Ephesus, when he stopped by there for
the first time on his way back to Jerusalem from Corinth.
This believing couple continued to attend synagogue in Ephesus, where they would be able to share with
the Jews and God-fearing Gentiles the good news of Jesus. And thats where they encountered Apollos,
who was boldly sharing with the Jews - about their Coming Messiah.
It became quickly evident to Aquila and Priscilla that Apollos didnt know the Messiah had come, and so
afterwards, they spent some time with him alone, and told him all about Jesus. You can just imagine how
all of those prophecies of Scripture inside of Apollos bore witness to each detail, as they told him of the
life, the death, and the resurrection of Jesus. Needless to say, Apollos would have quickly embraced this
good news with great joy, and would have then eagerly learned all he could from Aquila and Priscilla. And
once he had learned, he was ready to share with others - fervent in spirit as he was.
v. 27-28 We can be sure it was Aquila and Priscilla who suggested Apollos go to Corinth in Achaia, as they
remembered all of those Jews who opposed Paul, when he preached the gospel there. And there were still
many Gentiles in city, who didnt believe.
The couple knew that Apollos would be particularly useful to the Lord in Corinth, as he was trained in
rhetoric and debate, which carried such an appeal among Greeks and Romans. And the Spirit would direct
Apollos as to just how to communicate the gospel to them. We see that this took the form of public debates
with the Jews, and from what Paul says of Apollos later in our letter, the Lord worked mightily through him
(1 Cor 3:6).
It was while Apollos was in Corinth that Paul came to Ephesus, so at that time, they never actually met.
But both men would have heard a great deal about one another from other believers.

# 5: 10-3-14 E

By the time that Paul is writing his reply to the assembly in Corinth, about two years later, Apollos had
departed from Corinth. In fact, there is evidence that Apollos was ministering in Ephesus as Paul was
writing this letter (1 Cor 16:12)!
[Return to First Corinthians 1]
As Paul goes on, he draws specifics from the report he has received to confront the Corinthians with the
source of their contentiousness.
v. 12-13 In verse 12, the word that can also be translated because, which I think clarifies what Paul is
saying, here. Now I say this - that there are contentions among you - because each of you says - and
then the quotes that follow validate Pauls point - there are indeed contentions among them.
Paul then goes on in verse 13 asking a series of absurd questions, to get the Corinthians to see the
inconsistency in what they are doing, with the unity of Christ.
Now, some think that what is said in verse 12 shows what the issue is, in Corinth - that they are fighting
over various teachers who have taught in their assembly, favoring the style of one over another, and it has
gotten to the point that the assembly is being torn apart over the issue.
But would simply liking a certain teaching style actually cause this amount of division - especially in light
of the fact that the teachers are no longer there? And even if that were possible, there is one thing that
allows us to dismiss this as a possibility. If it were about teaching style, and favoritism, why would Paul
have included, I am of Christ? That does not make sense.
But if instead we see that the commonality between the four whom Paul has listed is not teaching, but
authority, we begin to get some light on the subject.
The Corinthians arent favoring one teacher over another. They are speaking in the name of one teacher or
another, using the teachers authority as a platform to endorse their own thinking, within the assembly: I
am of Paul, and Paul taught us.; Well, I am of Apollos, and Apollos said They are boasting in their
teachers, to promote themselves (1 Cor 3:21). And there are those who are even using the name of Christ,
in an effort to trump everyone else! So the issue is authority.
The biggest word in verse 12 is actually the smallest word: I. This self-promotion, which began on the part
of some, is now tearing the rest of the assembly apart, with contentions.
Now, the individuals who are trying to promote themselves know exactly what they are doing, and they are
determined to do it. Pauls questions are not intended for them; instead, they are intended for those who are
following them, who are getting caught up in their scheme. Paul intends to expose their scheme for what it
is - a scam.
Paul first asks, Is Christ divided? This pertains to the one or ones who are saying, I am of Christ. Paul
is asking, Are only some of you believers in Corinth of Christ ? - to which they must answer in their
minds, Of course not; as believers, were all of Christ! So how could some claim Christs authority over
and against other believers?
Next Paul uses himself as the example and asks, Was Paul crucified for you? And the believers would
think, Of course not; Christ was crucified, for all of us. So shouldnt Christ alone have the say over the
Life that He died to give them? Yes. Then why are different ones trying to have the say?

# 5: 10-3-14 E

And finally Paul asks, Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? Again, they would think, Of course
not; we were all baptized in the name of Christ. To be baptized in the name of someone indicates their
ownership - the one baptized bears their name. Does Paul, or anyone else, own them? No. They are Christ
Ones; only Christ owns them; He purchased them with His own blood (Acts 20:28).
What Paul is showing them is that Christ, and only Christ, is the authority over all of them, as believers the One who died for them, the One who by their water baptism they indicated is the owner of them; their
Lord.
Their teachers - Paul, Apollos, Peter - are also owned by Christ, and submit to His authority. What these
three teachers have taught them, each in their own unique way, is the truth that is in Christ Jesus - the same
truth - a truth that would bring unity of thinking. So what Paul is revealing to them here is that the source
of their division must lie, not in their teachers, but in the individuals in Corinth who are claiming to be of
them.
Paul then continues with some thoughts about baptism.
v. 14-17a So Paul mentions a few of the individuals he baptized in Corinth, while he was there. There was
Crispus, a former ruler of the synagogue (Acts 18:8). And there was Gaius, a Roman, who had a church in
his home, and was host to Paul when he was in town (Rm 16:23). And later Paul thinks of one more Stephanas, and his family. Stephanas became active in the ministry in Corinth, and he brought this letter to
Paul (1 Cor 16:15-17).
Now, we might be inclined to think that Paul is just digressing here, reminiscing as to who he actually
baptized, in Corinth. But we must remember that Paul is writing by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit there are no wasted words. Paul mentions baptism six times in five verses. I think he is making a point;
lets see if we can understand it, in light of what hes been saying.
So first, lets think about baptism, for a moment. It is clear by the context that Paul is referring to water
baptism. We can know this because Paul speaks of having baptized some individuals; it was a physical act,
whereby they were immersed in water.
What happened to these individuals, when Paul did that? They got wet. Did water baptism change them?
No. Did water baptism save them? No. Did water baptism empower them? No. Water baptism is only
symbolic; theres no power, in the act.
So why did they get baptized, then? Water baptism provides a witness, to others. What does this witness
say? That the individual has repented of his sins. That he has believed into Christ, to save him. That
having believed into Christ, he has received Christ as His Lord.
Water baptism symbolizes cleansing, and regeneration, and ownership - the individual now belongs to
Christ - His owner, His Master. It shows that he is a Christ One; he bears His name. Jesus told His
disciples that those who believe are to be water baptized (Mt 28:19) - their witness, to Him.
So we see that there is no power availed to the believer in water baptism - its just a powerful witness. But
what water baptism symbolizes is no less than the power of God, as the Creator and Redeemer of men.
Lets take a brief look at that. Turn to Romans chapter 6. Paul wrote of the spiritual reality behind
symbolic water baptism; a reality which enables the believer to live his righteousness. Paul is speaking to
the assembly in Rome concerning sanctification - that vital subject.

# 5: 10-3-14 E

Paul has just been saying that Gods gift of righteousness in Christ more than covers the believers sin; he is
fully justified. Then Paul asks an absurd question, to introduce the subject of sanctification.
[Romans 6:1-4, 11]
v. 1-2 Paul is essentially asking, then should we not be concerned about continuing to sin? After all, God
has sin more than covered (Rm 5:20). Paul asks this question to resoundingly refute it, lest some assume he
is advocating licentiousness.
Paul indicates that continuing to sin would be utterly inconsistent with our new situation, in relation to sin.
What is that new situation, in verse 2? We died to the sin. Paul uses the illustration of death to stress the
finality of this new situation; the irreversibility of it; the absolute separation, it creates. Then Paul shows
how this was achieved.
v. 3-4 This baptism - into Christ Jesus Himself - is the powerful spiritual reality that water baptism
symbolizes. United to Christ by faith, we were baptized into His death; Christs death became our death.
Through death, we died to the sin - and death is utterly final. Here we see our justification - the removal of
the sin from the sinner - symbolized in the immersion in water.
Paul says that not only have we died, we were buried with Christ. Burial involves the separation of the dead
body from the world of the living. Death is an absolute separation. And in this, we see our sanctification separation from the world, separation unto God. In water baptism, this is symbolized by the brief
submersion under water.
And finally, Paul speaks of Christ being raised from the dead, by the glory of the Father - what is Paul
referring to? The resurrection, when Christs body was changed into a glorified body of eternal Life. And
Paul says, even so we also.
Paul is speaking of our glorification; pictured in water baptism by rising up out of the water. Through
death, God has removed us from the creation in Adam and raised us up a new creation, in Christ. Thats
completely irreversible; theres no going back, praise God!
From the eternal perspective, we have already been raised with Christ (Col 3:1) - were justified, sanctified,
glorified. But from the temporal perspective, here on earth, we are not yet glorified; were still in the
process of being sanctified. But Paul says here, even so we should walk in newness of life. The Greek
expresses possibility.
It is possible for us to walk in newness of life - how? We have received the life of Christ - eternal Life for
the body. We can walk in that new life. But it is possible for us not to do so, as well. How? Under time,
we are still in a flesh body, and we can still walk according to it - the way we always used to walk, here on
earth. So how do we walk in the new life that we have? Look at verse 11.
v. 11 We walk in that new life that we have by reckoning on what God has done for us, in Christ - by
continually recognizing that it is true. We really have died to the sin, once and for all; we really are alive
unto God, in Christ Jesus our Lord. We have the power of a new life. And as we count on that, we will
walk in newness of Life, here and now - and experience the power of a sanctified life.
[Return to First Corinthians]

# 5: 10-3-14 E

Now as mentioned, Paul is speaking of water baptism, here - the symbolic baptism that those in Corinth
received, which they first believed into Christ. Each of the believers had been baptized in the name of
Jesus Christ, a witness of His ownership of them. And as we have seen in verse 13, Paul makes a point of
this fact, showing the absurdity if someone were baptized in any other name - like Pauls.
But why does Paul go further than this? Why is he thankful that he has baptized so few? Well, he answers
that in verse 15, expressing his concern that some might say he was baptizing in his own name.
What does Paul mean? As we have seen, water baptism pictures the conversion of the believer; they have
turned from sin, and turned to God, to be saved. As this is done by God in Christ, they are now Christs
converts.
What Paul is expressing his concern about is that those whom he baptized might be viewed as his own
personal converts, widening the gaps between the camps of thinking that were dividing the assembly in
Corinth.
It would seem that Paul baptized very few; no doubt he was too busy preaching the gospel, and teaching
the new converts. We can be sure that Apollos also baptized new converts, when he was there; and perhaps
Peter, as well.
Who was baptizing new converts after these teachers left? Perhaps other teachers; or perhaps leaders of the
home churches. Could it be that there were those who were using baptism as a means to further exalt
themselves, in the eyes of church members, in Corinth?
This may be why Paul continues writing here about baptism - with the determination to regain a proper
perspective on this symbolic act. Notice that Paul is very nonchalant about exactly who he baptized - this
one, that one, oh - and this one too, and his household - and maybe others, I dont know.
Why is he doing this? To show how unimportant it is who is doing the baptizing. After all, its just
performing a symbolic ceremony - anyone could do it. In this way, Paul is deflating those in the assembly
who were attempting to puff themselves up, by this means.
As Paul continues, he makes it clear that performing baptisms was merely incidental to the overriding
reason that the Lord sent him to Corinth.
v. 17 So Paul shows here the relative unimportance of performing water baptisms, compared to the vital
importance of preaching the gospel - to help the Corinthians see things in their proper perspective.
Paul is now beginning to transition into his first main point. He will be contrasting the message of the cross
- the gospel of Christ - to what he terms here the wisdom of words - that is, human wisdom; the wisdom
of the world, of which Greek philosophy is a kind.
The first thing that Paul has to say about worldly wisdom is that he did not use it, to preach the gospel.
Why not? Because it had the potential to make the cross of no effect; that is, to empty the cross of its
power.
What is the power of the cross? Its the power to save; to deliver men from sin and death. To change the
message of the cross in any way - to add to it; to embellish it; to sugar-coat it; to blur or soften its
declarations - is to diminish the person and the work of Christ, and thereby rob the cross of its power to
save.

# 5: 10-3-14 E
Paul is saying that the cross is not something to which one may add human wisdom and in that way, make
it superior; rather, he declares that the cross stands in absolute, uncompromising contradiction to human
wisdom.
And he will continue on that note, next week.
Reading: Rm 5:9-11, Is 29, Mt 12:38-42.