1 Corinthians 1

1Co 1:1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and our brother Sosthenes,

1Co 1-3 centers upon the problem of worldly versus divine wisdom (with the cross as the centerpiece of divine wisdom).

Christ Jesus – Christ is named 10 times in so many verses. ‘When Paul had once mentioned his name, he knows not how to part with it.’ (Flavel)

Sosthenes – It is not know whether this is the same person who had been ruler of a synagogue in Corinth but was converted under Paul’s ministry, Ac 18:17-18.

1Co 1:2 To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ-their Lord and ours:

To the church of God in Corinth – There is an important lesson here for all expositors. ‘Imagine that Paul’s letters to the Corinthians had gotten lost in the mails and instead had been delivered to the Christians at Philippi. The Philippians would have puzzled over the specific problems Paul wrote about since they lived in a different situation than their brethren in Corinth. The letters of the New Testament, like the prophecies of the Old, were addressed to specific assemblies struggling with particular problems. Expository sermons today will be ineffective unless the preacher realizes that his listeners too exist at a particular address and have mindsets unique to them.’ (Robinson, Expository Preaching, 27)

Sanctified in Christ Jesus – For a Trinitarian aspect, cf. Jude 1:1 1Pe 1:2.

1Co 1:3 Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Grace and peace to you – ‘Grace is one of the great Christian words. It resembles the usual Greek salutation, but there is the world of difference between ‘greeting’ (‘chairein’) and ‘grace’ (‘charis’). Grace reminds us of God’s free gift to men, and more especially of his free gift in Christ. ‘Peace’ is the usual Hebrew greeting. But the Heb., ‘shalom’, means more than does ‘peace’ in English. It is not simply the absence of strife, but the presence of positive blessings. It is the prosperity of the whole man, especially his spiritual prosperity.’ (Leon Morris)

1Co 1:4 I always thank God for you because of his grace given you in Christ Jesus.

I always thank God for you – ‘Helpful affirmation is important. Paul wrote some strong words to the Corinthians in this letter, but he began on a positive note. He affirmed their privilege of being in God’s family, the power God gave them to speak out for him and understand his truth, and the presence of their spiritual gifts. Regardless of his letters’ contents, Paul’s style was always affirming. He began most of them by stating what he most appreciated about his readers and the joy he felt because of their faith in God. When we must correct others, it helps to begin by affirming what God has already accomplished in them.’ (HBA)

1 Cor 1:5  For in him you have been enriched in every way-in all your speaking and in all your knowledge-

1Co 1:6 because our testimony about Christ was confirmed in you.

Confirmed in you – ‘Pentecostal and Charismatic interpreters, among others, tend to have the meaning of this verse supplemented by the reference to (spiritual) gifts in 1:7, 1-10 so that Paul is interpreted as teaching that the spiritual gifts, as presented most clearly in 12-14, are the source of enrichment and confirmation of the message of Christ. Other scholars infer a non-charismatic reading of 1:7 by looking more at the evidence regarding the confirmation of the testimony about Christ in: (1) the conversion stories from Corinth in Acts 18, (2) Pauline use of Scripture as confirmation, (3) Christian proclamation, and, (4) Paul’s references to the Spirit of sonship as providing confirming testimony.’ (College Press)

1Co 1:7 Therefore you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed.

You do not lack any spiritual gift – Gk. charisma. This expression may refer to gifts such as those discussed in chapters 12-14. Some commentators, however (including Calvin and Fee) suggest that it may have more to do with salvation than divine enablement. The same word is used in 1Co 7:7 in a context that apparently has nothing to do with ‘spiritual gifts’ as defined by Pentecostalists and charismatics.

The eschatological context of this phrase (‘as you eagerly await…’) seems to suggest that God intends no cessation of the charismata until Christ’s return.

As you eagerly wait – ‘The second advent of Christ, so clearly predicted by himself and by his apostles, connected as it is with the promise of the resurrection of his people and the consummation of his kingdom, was the object of longing expectation to all the early Christians. So great is the glory connected with that event that Paul, in Ro 8:18-23, not only represents all present affliction as trifling in comparison, but decribes the whole creation as looking forward to it with earnest expectation. Cf. Php 3:20 Tit 2:13. So general was this expectation that Christians were characterised as those “who love his appearing,” 2Ti 4:8, and as those “who wait for him,” Heb 9:28.’ (Charles Hodge)

‘Paul can hardly be faulted for not knowing that the church of God at Corinth would itself cease to exist (along with its gifts) long before the return of Christ.’ (College Press)

1Co 1:8 he will keep you strong to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

So that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ – Cf. Col 1:22 Eph 5:27 1Th 5:23.

1Co 1:9 God, who has called you into fellowship with his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, is faithful.

God…has called you into fellowship (koinonia) with his Son Jesus Christ our Lord – in this verse, ‘Anderson Scott’s view aims at seeing koinonia as a designation of the church; but his interpretation here and elsewhere is being increasingly abandoned in favour of the objective sense of the genitive (or, with Deissmann, the ‘mystical genitive’ or ‘genitive of fellowship’). So the best translation of a difficult verse is ‘fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord’ whether in the sense of ‘sharing in’ or ‘sharing with’ him.’ (NBC)

‘The person with whom believers are…intimately united, is “the Son of God,” of the same nature, being the same in substance and equal in power and glory. He is also “Jesus,” a man; consequently he is both God and man, in two distinct natures, and one person. This incarnate God, the Saviour, is “the Christ,” of whom the Old Testament says and promises so much. He is also “our Lord,” we belong to him; he is our possessor, our sovereign, our protector. How can they apostatise and perish who stand in this relation to the eternal Son of God?’ (Charles Hodge)

God…is faithful – Cf. 1Co 10:13 2Co 1:18.

1Co 1:10 I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.

Fee identifies four aspects to ‘the problem’ which Paul addresses in 1Co 1:10-4:21:-

1. There is quarreling, disunity and party-spirit, 1Co 1:10-12 3:3-4 3:21.

2. This quarreling and disunity is being carried on in the name of ‘wisdom’ (the sophia/sophos word-group dominates the discussion in chapters 1-3. Because in most cases Paul uses it in a perjorative sense: it is clear that this is a Corinthian way of speaking, not a Pauline.

3. There is evidence to ‘boasting’ and being ‘puffed up’ 1Co 1:29-31 3:21 4:6-7,18-19. Their quarrels took the form of boasting that they were followers of mere men in the name of wisdom, 1Co 3:18-21.

4. Paul’s response has an apologetic ring to it: Paul is defending both his past ministry and his present relationship with them, 1Co 1:16-17 2:1-3:4 4:1-21. The party-spirit extended to being not only for Apollos (say), but also against Paul.

The issue of quarreling and disunity may not be the only or even the most important problem in the Corinthian church. Its significance is great, however, because it represents a profound threat to the gospel in that human wisdom was being allowed to subvert the divine plan of salvation.

Paul’s argument can be summarised as follows:-

1. Statement of the problem, 1Co 1:10-17.

2. The nature of the gospel 1Co 1:18-25, their own experience of it 1Co 1:26-31, and Paul’s preaching of it 1Co 2:1-5 all contradict their new stance based on worldly wisdom.

3. Even though the gospel is viewed by the world as foolishness, it is in fact the supreme expression of divine wisdom, 1Co 2:6-3:4.

4. They have a radical misunderstanding of the nature of the church and the role of its leadership, 1Co 3:5-17.

5. Boasting in mere human is forbidden, and they are to redirect their focus on Christ, 1Co 3:18-23.

6. Paul turns to their rejection of him and his ministry and tells them that they may not judge someone else’s servant, 1Co 4:1-5.

7. He challenges their pride by contrasting his own ministry, with its focus on the cross, with their false theology, 1Co 4:6-13.

8. He reasserts his authority, using the image of father and children, 1Co 4:14-21.

‘In order to understand the rhetoric and the flow of Paul’s theological thought and reasoning in this literary unit of 1Co 1:10-4:21, it is imperative to acknowledge the single focus of this entire section. Even though there is an amazing variety in the rhetoric, in the illustrations, in the sub-arguments, and in the tenor of the material stretching from 1Co 1:18-4:21, one must not lose sight of the fact that all this is Paul’s argument against the dissensions and quarreling mentioned in 1Co 1:10-12. The reason that this point must be made explicitly here is that sometimes interpreters use portions of Paul’s arguments in this section as though they were directed to outsiders, to the lost of the world. While admittedly 1Co 1:18-31 describes the unsaved world of Paul’s day, both Jew and Greek, it is unacceptable to stop with that mere observation since it is clear that this section of Paul’s argument was intended by Paul both to address and to ameliorate the problem of party strife among believers at Corinth. Proper interpretation of this section must discern the flow of Paul’s thought by which he adapted this description of the attitudes of a world alienated from God into his argument designed to undermine the divisions among believers based upon personal loyalty. To miss this point is to miss the Pauline intention behind all the variety in this section and it runs the great risk of misusing material from this section to make points and doctrinal affirmations which Paul had no intention of making.’

Brothers – ‘Twice Paul addresses the Corinthians as brothers. As Beza, the old commentator said, “In that word too there lies hidden an argument.” By the very use of the word Paul does two things. First, he softens the rebuke which is given, not as from a schoolmaster with a rod, but as from one who has no other emotion than love. Second, it should have shown them how wrong their dissensions and divisions were. They were brothers and they should have lived in brotherly love.’ (DSB)

That all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought – ‘How sad is it to see religion wearing a coat of divers colours; to see Christians of so many opinions, and going so many different ways! It is Satan that has sown these tares of division. Mt 13:39. He first divided men from God, and then one man from another.’ (Thomas Watson)

1Co 1:11 my brothers, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you.

There are quarrels among you

‘Comedian Emo Philips used to tell this story:

In conversation with a person I had recently met, I asked, “Are you Protestant or Catholic?”

My new acquaintance replied, “Protestant.”

I said, “Me too! What denomination?”

He answered, “Baptist.”

“Me too!” I said. “Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?”

“Northern Baptist,” he replied.

“Me too!” I shouted.

We continued to go back and forth. Finally I asked, “Northern conservative fundamentalist Baptist, Great Lakes Region, Council of 1879 or Northern conservative fundamentalist Baptist, Great Lakes Region, Council of 1912?”

He replied, “Northern conservative fundamentalist Baptist, Great Lakes Region, Council of 1912.”

I said, “Die, heretic!”‘

1Co 1:12 What I mean is this: one of you says, “I follow Paul;” another, “I follow Apollos;” another, “I follow Cephas;” still another, “I follow Christ.”

‘In almost all the apostolic churches there were contentions between the Jewish and Gentile converts. As Paul was the apostle of the Gentiles, and Peter of the Jews, Ga 2:8, it is probable that the converts from among the Gentiles claimed Paul as their leader, and the Jewish converts appealed to the authority of Peter…The Gentile converts, however, were not united among themselves. While some said, we are of Paul; others said, we are of Apollos. As Apollos was an Alexandrian Jew, distinguished for literary culture and eloquence, it is probable that the more highly educated among the Corinthian Christians were his peculiar followers…Who those were who said, we are of Christ, it is not so easy to determine…They must…have claimed some peculiar relation to Christ which they denied to theit fellow believers.’ (Charles Hodge)

1Co 1:13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul?

Baptism is mentioned in four passages in this letter: 1Co 1:13-17 (water baptism); 1Co 10:2 (baptism into Moses); 1Co 12:13 (Baptism by the Spirit); 1Co 15:29 (baptism for the dead). There is also a reference to ‘washing’ in 1Co 6:11.

1 Cor 1:14  I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius,

1 Cor 1:15  so no one can say that you were baptized into my name.

1Co 1:16 (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.)

I also baptized the household of Stephanas – In Ac 16:33 Paul baptised the whole family when the Philippian jailer comes to faith. ‘Seen against the background of the ancient world, where the father as head of the family was practically omnipotent, it would have been very surprising if the household (which included slaves and children) were not baptised along with their head. As a Jew Paul would have ha dthe precedent of Old Testament circumcision. The children of believers shared in the sign and seal of the covenant, circumcision, long before they were old enough to understand its implications…Their was ample precedent, then, for the baptism of households, and many Christians believe that this still holds good, and that baptism may fittingly be administered to the children of those who are themselves believers, not in order to make the child belong to God but because the child does belong to God. He entrusted it to those parents. He died for it and rose again in Christ; and he offers it the pledge of justification and incorporation into his family long before the child itself is able to make any response one way or the other.’ (Freen)

Barrett, on the other hand, says that ‘it should be noted that at 1Co 16:15 the household…of Stephanas are said to have set themselves for service to the saints. This could hardly be said of children, and the presumption is that in using this word Paul is thinking of adults.’ But, there again, Paul could be using the expression household simply to denote the family as a whole.

The fact that infant baptism receives no explicit mention in the NT can be explained when we remember that the Church was in a missionary phase, when the emphasis would naturally fall on the baptism of adults. Nevertheless, the NT does speak of the baptism of households, which would be likely to contain children, Ac 16:15,33 1Co 1:16. Calvin points out that if were are to exclude children from baptism because there is no explicit scriptural warrant, we must exclude women from the Lord’s Supper for the same reason!

When a ‘household’ is referred to, this would also have included the slaves, cf. Ro 16:10-11 1Co 1:11 Ac 11:14).

*Family, Centrality of, Acts 11:14n *Salvation of Infants, 2Sa 12:23n

1Co 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel-not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

Not with words of human wisdom – i.e. ‘not with the wisdom of rhetoric’.

‘The Corinthians loved public orations (Dio Chrysostom Or. 37.33). Paul saw the use of “the wisdom of rhetoric” {1Co 1:17} as the means of “emptying” the preaching of the cross, for it was more interested in the skillful structuring and delivery of a speech than in its content (Epictetus Diss. 3.23.23-25). By citing the OT in 1Co 1:19 {citing Isa 29:4 Ps 33:10} and 1Co 1:31, {citing Jer 9:22-23} he argued that God determined that “the debater of this age,” that is, the virtuoso rhetor, or sophist (Philo Det. Pot. Ins. 1-5), as well as the Greek philosophers (see Philosophy) and Jewish teachers {1Co 1:20} did not bring people to the knowledge of God. Paul explained why he had renounced in his modus operandi all formal conventions whereby a foreign rhetor established his credentials when he first came to a city. {1Co 2:1-5} he tells why he would not proclaim the gospel using the superior presentation of rhetoric or wisdom. {1Co 2:1} While rhetors sought topics from their audience on which to declaim in order to demonstrate their prowess in oratory, Paul was concerned only to proclaim Jesus, the crucified Messiah. {1Co 2:2} Orators used three accepted proofs to persuade their audience: acting out a character; manipulating his audience’s feeling; and demonstration, arguments. Paul uses none of these. He came “in weakness, and in fear and in much trembling” {1Co 2:3} -the absolute antithesis to the powerful and commanding presence of the virtuoso rhetor (Philodemus On Rhetoric 1.194-200). His speech and his preaching did not make use of “persuasive rhetoric.” It was a demonstration, not of rhetorical proofs, but of the Spirit and power. {1Co 2:4} It was a radical and costly step on the part of Paul to refuse to use the much admired rhetoric of his day in preaching. His renunciation was motivated by the desire that his converts’ faith must not rest on human wisdom but on the power of God.’ {1Co 2:5} (DPL) See JEM “2Co 10:10″

‘Does Paul, in this verse, completely condemn the wisdom of words as something in opposition to Christ?…I answer that Paul would not be so very unreasonable as to condemn out of hand those arts, which, without any doubt, are splendid gifts of God, gifts which we could call instruments for helping men carry out worthwhile activities. Therefore there is nothing irreligious about those arts, for they contain sound learning, and depend on principles of truth; and since they are useful and suitable for the general affairs of human society, there is no doubt that they have come from the Holy Spirit. Further, the usefulness which is derived and experienced from them ought not to be ascribed to anyone but God. Therefore what Paul says here is not to be taken as disparaging to the arts, as if they were working against religion.’ (Calvin)

‘Sometimes this passage has been read alongside Acts 17. When Paul was in Athens, it is argued, he changed his usual approach while speaking to the philosophers on Mars Hill. Previously he had merely declared the gospel without getting involved in philosophy and intellectual argument. In Athens he tried to meet the pagan philosophers on their own ground. What we find in 1Co 1-2, it is claimed, is an admission of his mistake, for he had come to Corinth from Athens. {cf. Ac 18:1}

Others understand ths passage to mean that the gospel is quite literally folly, that it is bad philosphy and hasn’t anything to do with reason. So the Christian’s responsibility is simply to declare the gospel, for, it is said, the gsoepl does not lend itself to argument.’ Macaulay and Barrs (Being Human), proceed to oppose these views by making three points:-

1. This passage cannot be made to conflict with either 1 Cor as a whole or with Ro 1:18-21. In both letters Paul asserts the reasonableness of Christianity. In Rom 1 Paul states that people are guilty before Gd not in the first place because they are immoral but because they have made inexcusable errors in their thinking. In 1Co 12-14 Paul emphasises that communications in the church must be made in words that can be understood.

2. Paul does not mean that the gospel is intrinsically foolish. Paul’s point (e.g. in 1Co 1:17-25) is not that the gospel is foolish but that it is foolish in the eyes of the world. Indeed, his claim is that the gospel is ‘the wisdom of God’, 1:24. The Christian faith is not bad philosophy: it is the best philosophy. It is the best philosophy because it comes from the source of all true wisdom God himself. Whether or not we regard Christianity as a philosophy, it claims sovereignty over the same territory as philosophy, ‘just as rival governments sometimes lay claim to the same geographical area.’

3. The expression ‘the cross of Christ’ is not to be read narrowly. In using this expression, Paul was not saying that the cross of Christ was all he ever talked about, still less that it functioned for him as a slogan or mantra. The Pauline statement that he decided ‘to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified’ (2:2) cannot be used to support an non-intellectual or irrational approach to the gospel. The contrast in Paul is not between wisdom and foolishness but between worldly wisdom (which God calls foolishness) and divine wisdom (which the world calls foolishness).

It is clear from what we know about his ministry that Paul used a reasoned approach in his preaching and teaching. He argued; he sought to persuade; he declared ‘the whole counsel of God’; {Ac 20:27} he wanted to capture and captivate the mind for Christ. {2Co 10:4f}

Lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power – ‘To substitute a system of notions, however true and ennobling, for the fact of Christ’s death, is like confounding the theory of gravitation with gravitation itself.’ (Edwards) In what ways do Christians today empty the cross of its power, by taking on board worldly wisdom?

1Co 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

In this passage Paul unfolds the wisdom of God in three ways: the cross of Christ (1:18-25), the plan of God (1:26-31), and the ministry of the Holy Spirit (1:26-31).

The message of the cross – ‘Paul turns now directly to his strategy of bringing the believers to their spiritual senses by reminding them that the cross of Christ, on which their salvation rests, is disdained by the world. Paul is attempting to alienate the Corinthians’ affections for worldly values and cultural acceptability, while at the same time rekindling their loyalty for the centrality of Christ crucified and the explicit foolishness attached thereto.’ (College Press)

The message – is lit. ‘the word’ (logos – also used in v17). ‘To the early church the word was a message revealed from God in Christ, which was to be preached, ministered and obeyed. It was the word of life, {Php 2:16} of truth, {Eph 1:13} of salvation, {Ac 13:26} of reconciliation, {2Co 5:19} of the cross.’ {1Co 1:18} (NBD)

‘For Paul the “word of the cross” {1Co 1:18 NASB} is the heart of the gospel, and the preaching of the cross is the soul of the church’s mission. “Christ crucified” (1Co 1:23; compare 2:2 Ga 3:1) is more than the basis of our salvation; the cross was the central event in history, the one moment which demonstrated God’s control of and involvement in human history. In 1Co 1:17-2:16 Paul contrasted the “foolishness” of the “preaching of the cross” with human “wisdom” (1:17-18), for only in the cross can salvation be found and only in the foolish “preaching of the cross” and “weakness” can the “power of God” be seen (1:21,25). Jesus as the lowly one achieved his glory by virtue of his suffering-only the crucified one could become the risen one (1:26-30). Such a message certainly was viewed as foolish in the first century; Roman historians like Tacitus and Suetonius looked upon the idea of a “crucified God” with contempt.’ (Holman)

The public proclamation kerygma of this doctrine is the great means of salvation. All other means simply prepare for this or are subordinate to it. This proclamation, whether to an individual or a crowd, whether from the pulpit or by the road-side includes the communication of truth. Ac 8:35, Philip…told him the good news about Jesus.

Those who are perishing – The same word is used in v19 (translated there ‘destroy’). They have not met their final end yet, but are regarded as already ‘perishing’. Cf. 2Th 2:10.

Those who are perishing…us who are being saved – The Cross divides humankind into two classes only – the perishing and the saved. ‘In the language of the New Testament salvation is a thing of the past, a thing of the present, and a thing of the future.’ (Lightfoot)

Foolishness…power of God – Paul might have said here that the cross is the wisdom of God, cf. vv24, 30, but its saving power must first be experienced, before the full splendour of its wisdom can be perceived.

*Preaching and Systematic Theology, 2Ti 1:13n *Salvation – Tenses of, Eph 2:8n

1Co 1:19 For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”

“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise” – The Gk. underlying ‘destroy’ is the same word as translated ‘perishing’ in v18. The quote is from Isa 29:14, which refers to God nullifying of the wisdom of Hezekiah’s advisors under the threat of Assyrian invasion. It is interesting to note the number of times Paul deals with problems and issues in this pagan setting by quoting Scripture. Cf. his argument in chapter 10.

1Co 1:20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

Where is the wise man? – Cf. Isa 19:12. ‘Pharaoh’s counsellors, for all their false pretensions to wisdom, could not foresee, much less frustrate, the judgement of Jehovah upon Egypt. The quotation is apt because the Greeks also glorified in their wisdom, but God will clearly show the futility of every form of reasoning that fails to reckon with him.’ (Wilson)

Where is the scholar? – or scribe. Cf. Isa 33:18. ‘After God’s deliverance of his people from the Assyrian danger, men will ask in astonishment, “What has become of the scribe who was to tabulate the tribute that had been forced from the Jews.”‘ (Wilson, quoting Lenski)

Where is the philosopher of this age? – This term ‘would apply equally well to the dialectical subtlety of the Greek and to the legal casuistry of the Jew.’ (Wilson)

Of this age – The construction indicates that this applies equally to the wise man, the scholar, and the philosopher. Their wisdom belongs to this age, to a world that is perishing. ‘This brief phrase serves as a window into Paul’s eschatological thinking.’ (College Press)

Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? – The wisdom of God and the wisdom of the world are opposed to each other; each counts the other’s wisdom foolishness. ‘Paul declares that in fact God has looked upon the greatest wisdom and cultural acumen available in prosperous urban centers like Corinth and still regards it all as foolishness.’ (College Press) What might be regarded today as ‘the wisdom of the world’? How has God made it foolish? {cf. Ro 1:21f}

‘Jesus Christ must by his Spirit open the understandings of men, or they can never comprehend such mysteries. Some men have strong natural parts, and by improvement of them are become eagle-eyed in the mysteries of nature. Who more acute than the heathen sages? Yet, to them the gospel seemed foolishness, 1Co 1:20. Austin confesses, that before his conversion, he often felt his spirit swell with offence and contempt of the gospel; and he despising it, said dedignabar esse parvulus; “he scorned to become a child again.” Bradwardine, that profound doctor, learned usque ad stuporem, even to a wonder, professes that when he read Paul’s epistles, he condemned them, because in them he found not a metaphysical wit. Surely, it is possible a man may, with Berengarius, be able to dispute de omni scibili, of every point of knowledge; to unravel nature from the cedar in Lebanon, to the hyssop on the wall; and yet be as blind as a bat in the knowledge of Christ. Yes, it is possible a man’s understanding may be improved by the gospel, to a great ability in the literal knowledge of it, so as to be able to expound the scriptures orthodoxly, and enlighten others by them, as it is Mt 7:22. The Scribes and Pharisees were well acquainted with the scriptures of the Old Testament; yea, such were their abilities, and esteem among the people for them, that the apostle stiles them the princes of this world, 1Co 2:8. And yet notwithstanding Christ truly calls them blind guides, Mat. 23. Till Christ open the heart, we can know nothing of him, or of his will, as we ought to know it. So experimentally true is that of the apostle, 1Co 2:14,15 “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual, judgeth all things; yet he himself is judged of no man.” The spiritual man can judge and discern the carnal man, but the carnal man wants a faculty to judge of the spiritual man: as a man that carries a dark lantern, can see another by its light, but the other cannot discern him. Such is the difference betwixt persons whose hearts Christ has, or has not opened.’ (Thomas Watson)

‘Man with all his shrewdness is as stupid about understanding by himself the mysteries of God, as an ass is incapable of understanding musical harmony.’ (Calvin)

*Paradoxes, Mt 23:12n

1Co 1:21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.

‘This is not inconsistent with Ro 1:20, where the apostle says, God’s eternal power and Godhead are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made. In this latter passage, Paul speaks of the revelation which God had made of himself; in the former, of the use which men had made of that revelation. The revelation was clear, but men…did not comprehend it…Besides, sometimes the knowledge of God in Scripture, means that speculative knowledge which human reason is adequate to derive from the works of God, and which renders their idolatry inexcusable; at other times, it means saving knowledge…Paul is here speaking of the knowledge which is connected with salvation. Such knowledge the world had failed to secure.’ (Charles Hodge)

‘To announce as the Saviour of the world one who died the vile death of a criminal on the cross seems, indeed, to be the acme of foolishness. To expect that this announcement will do what all the world with its mighty effort of wisdom failed to do, namely actually to lift man up again into communion with God, only intensifies the impression of foolishness.’ (Lenski)

‘The word preached, is virga virtutis, the rod of God’s strength; it is the great engine he uses for setting up the kingdom of grace in the heart. ‘Faith comes by hearing.’ Ro 10:17. Though God could work grace immediately by his Spirit, or by the ministry of angels from heaven, yet he chooses to work by the word preached. This is the usual mean, by which he sets up the kingdom of grace in the heart; and the reason is, because he has put his divine sanction upon it; he has appointed it for the means of working grace, and he will honour his own ordinance. 1Co 1:21. What reason could be given why the waters of Damascus should not have as sovereign virtue to heal Naaman’s leprosy, as the waters of Jordan, but this, that God appointed and sanctified the waters of Jordan to heal, and not the others? Let us keep the word preached, because the power of God goes along with it.’ (Thomas Watson)

God cannot be known through human wisdom. Cf. 1Co 2:14 2Co 4:3-4 Joh 1:18.

‘God so arranged matters that it would be impossible for humans to know God through and on the basis of their own wisdom. The Apostle’s declaration that God did what pleased him finds its theological roots in the Old Testament idea of the sovereign will of God. Ps 115:3 and 135:6 contain the verbal antecedents of Paul’s thoughts at this point in the affirmation that God does what pleases him. Even though Paul does not spell out here why God did it in this way, there are an abundant number of Scriptures which make clear God’s disdain and hatred for boasting, pride and self-righteousness stemming from humanity’s sense of self-determination and self-actualization, all of which would eventuate had mankind through its wisdom come to know God.’ (College Press)

*Paradoxes, Mt 23:12n *The World, James 4:4n

1Co 1:22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom,

Jews demand miraculous signs – ‘The Jews throughout their history were very matter-of-fact. They showed little interest in speculative thought. Their demand was for evidence, and their interest was in the practical. They thought of God as manifesting himself in history in signs and mighty wonders. In the light of this they demanded a sign from the Lord. {Mt 12:38 16:1,4 Mr 8:11-12 Joh 6:30} They thought of the Messiah as one attested by striking manifestations of power and majesty. A crucified Messiah was a contradiction in terms.’ (Leon Morris)

‘This very time during which Paul was writing produced a crop of false Messiahs, and all of them had beguiled the people into accepting them by the promise of wonders. In A.D. 45 a man called Theudas had emerged. He had persuaded thousands of the people to abandon their homes and follow him out to the Jordan, by promising that, at his word of command, the Jordan would divide and he would lead them dryshod across. In A.D. 54 a man from Egypt arrived in Jerusalem, claiming to be the Prophet. He persuaded thirty thousand people to follow him out to the Mount of Olives by promising that at his word of command the walls of Jerusalem would fall down. That was the kind of thing that the Jews were looking for. In Jesus they saw one who was meek and lowly, one who deliberately avoided the spectacular, one who served and who ended on a Cross-and it seemed to them an impossible picture of the Chosen one of God.’ (DSB)

‘Paul’s comments about the Jews probably contains an autobiographical element from his years of opposition to God’s Anointed. It also reflects an outlook similar to early Christian Gospel traditions which focused on this characteristic of certain Jews.’ {Mt 12:38-39 16:1-4 24:3,24} (College Press)

Jews demand miraculous signs…Greeks look for wisdom – The leading characteristics of both cultures are clearly identified here. The Jews, having already received a divine revelation, demand proof of the credibility of any new teaching that seems to challenge their status quo. The Greeks, on the other hand, were always searching, and found it well-nigh impossible to settle on an object of worship.

Greeks look for wisdom – Ponder the achievements of the Greeks in terms of culture and wisdom. But Paul pronounces these worthless so far as knowing God is concerned.

‘Originally the Greek word sophist meant a wise man in the good sense; but it came to mean a man with a clever mind and cunning tongue, a mental acrobat, a man who with glittering and persuasive rhetoric could make the worse appear the better reason. It meant a man who would spend endless hours discussing hair-splitting trifles, a man who had no real interest in solutions but who simply gloried in the stimulus of “the mental hike.” Dio Chrysostom describes the Greek wise men. “They croak like frogs in a marsh; they are the most wretched of men, because, though ignorant, they think themselves wise; they are like peacocks, showing off their reputation and the number of their pupils as peacocks do their tails.”

It is impossible to exaggerate the almost fantastic mastery that the silver-tongued rhetorician held in Greece. Plutarch says, “They made their voices sweet with musical cadences and modulations of tone and echoed resonances.” They thought not of what they were saying, but of how they were saying it. Their thought might be poisonous so long as it was enveloped in honeyed words. Philostratus tells us that Adrian, the sophist, had such a reputation in Rome, that when his messenger appeared with a notice that he was to lecture, the senate emptied and even the people at the games abandoned them to flock to hear him.

…The Greeks were intoxicated with fine words; and to them the Christian preacher with his blunt message seemed a crude and uncultured figure, to be laughed at and ridiculed rather than to be listened to and respected.’ (DSB)

1Co 1:23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,

We preach Christ crucified – ‘The verb “preach” is that appropriate to the action of a herald. In this sense it is a peculiarly Christian term. It is used little, if at all, in this way in the classics, in the LXX, or in current religious systems such as the mystery religions.’ (Leon Morris)

‘The seventeenth century Jesuits in China, in order not to upset the social sensitivities of the Chinese, excluded the crucifixion and certain other details from the gospel. But, Professor Hugh Trevor-Roper has written…, ‘we do not learn that they made many lasting converts by the unobjectionable residue of the story.’ (Stott, Authentic Christianity, 165)

Christ crucified – ‘For the Corinthians that’s like saying “fried ice.” ‘Messiah’ means power, glory, miracles; ‘crucified’ means weakness, shame, suffering. Thus they gladly accepted the false apostles, who preached a “different Gospel” with “another Jesus,” {2Co 11:4} and condemned Paul for his bodily weakness {2Co 10:10}

The story is told of a small English village that had a tiny chapel whose stone walls were covered by ivy. Over an arch was originally inscribed the words: ‘WE PREACH CHRIST CRUCIFIED’. There had been a generation of godly men who did precisely that: they preached Christ crucified.

But times changed. The ivy grew and pretty soon covered the last word of the inscription, so that it read, ‘WE PREACH CHRIST’. Other men came and they did preach Christ: but Christ without they cross; Christ the example, Christ the teacher.

As the years passed, the ivy continued to grow until finally the inscription read: ‘WE PREACH’. The generation that came along then did just that: they preached economics, politics, and the social gospel.

Finally, the ivy covered the remaining words of the inscription. The congregation dwindled and faded away, as the message of the gospel of God’s grace became neglected and forgotten.

A stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to Gentiles – Skandalon is perhaps better translated ‘offence’. Cf. Isa 53:3. ‘Since the Jews anticipated the advent of a victorious prince who would liberate them from the opperssor’s yoke, nothing could have been more repugnant to them than the scandal of a crucified Messiah.’ Cf. De 21:23 Ga 3:13. It was the doctrine on which they stumbled and fell, Ro 9:33 1Pe 2:8.’ (Wilson) ‘To Greeks and Romans the word of the Cross offered for Saviour and Lord a man branded throughout the Empie as amongst the basest of criminals; it was “outrageous,” and “absurd”.’ (Findlay)

‘One would have imagined that, when God sent his gospel to men, all men would meekly listen, and humbly receive its truths. We should have thought that God’s ministers had but to proclaim that life is brought to light by the gospel, and that Christ is come to save sinners, and every ear would be attentive, every eye would be fixed, and every heart would be wide open to receive the truth. We should have said, judging favorably of our fellow-creatures, that there would not exist in the world a monster so vile, so depraved, so polluted, as to put so much as a stone in the way of the progress of truth; we could not have conceived such a thing; yet that conception is the truth. When the gospel was preached, instead of being accepted and admired, one universal hiss went up to heaven; men could not bear it; its first preacher they dragged to the brow of the hill, and would have sent him down headlong; yea, they did more-they nailed him to the cross, and there they let him languish out his dying life in agony such as no man hath borne since. All his chosen ministers have been hated and abhorred by worldlings; instead of being listened to they have been scoffed at; treated as if they were the offscouring of all things, and the very scum of mankind. Look at the holy men in the old times, how they were driven from city to city, persecuted, afflicted, tormented, stoned to death, wherever the enemy had power to do so. Those friends of men, those real philanthropists, who came with hearts big with love, and hands full of mercy, and lips pregnant with celestial fire, and souls that burned with holy influence; those men were treated as if they were spies in the camp, as if they were deserters from the common cause of mankind; as if they were enemies, and not, as they truly were, the best of friends. Do not suppose, my friends, that men like the gospel any better now than they did then. There is an idea that you are growing better. I do not believe it. You are growing worse. In many respects men may be better-outwardly better; the heart within is still the same. The human heart of today dissected, would be like the human heart a thousand years ago; the gall of bitterness within that breast of yours, is just as bitter as the gall of bitterness in that of Simon of old. We have in our hearts the same latent opposition to the truth of God; and hence we find men, even as of old, who scorn the gospel.’ (Spurgeon)

Jews – ‘A respectable man the Jew was in his day; all formal religion was concentrated in his person; he went up to the temple very devoutly; he tithed all he had, even to the mint and the cummin. You would see him fast twice in the week, with a face all marked with sadness and sorrow. If you looked at him, he had the law between his eyes; there was the phylactery, and the borders of his garments of amazing width, that he might never be supposed to be a Gentile dog; that no one might ever conceive that he was not an Hebrew of pure descent. He had a holy ancestry; he came of a pious family; a right good man was he. He could not like those Sadducees at all, who had no religion. He was thoroughly a religious man; he stood up for his synagogue; he would not have that temple on Mount Gerizim; he could not bear the Samaritans, he had no dealings with them; he was a religionist of the first order, a man of the very finest kind; a specimen of a man who is a moralist, and who loves the ceremonies of the law.’ (Spurgeon, adding that there are many such people in every age, whether they are ethnic Jews or not.)

Foolishness to Gentiles – ‘To the Greek idea the first characteristic of God was apatheia. That word means more than apathy; it means total inability to feel. The Greeks argued that if God can feel joy or sorrow or anger or grief it means that some man has for that moment influenced God and is therefore greater than he. So, they went on to argue, it follows that God must be incapable of all feeling so that none may ever affect him. A God who suffered was to the Greeks a contradiction in terms.’ (DSB)

‘Both to the cultured Greek and to the pious Jew the story that Christianity had to tell sounded like the sheerest folly. Paul begins by making free use of two quotations from Isaiah {Isa 29:14 Isa 33:18} to show how mere human wisdom is bound to fail. He cites the undeniable fact that for all its wisdom the world had never found God and was still blindly and gropingly seeking him.’ (DSB)

‘Plutarch declared that it was an insult to God to involve him in human affairs. God of necessity was utterly detached. The very idea of incarnation, of God becoming a man, was revolting to the Greek mind. Augustine, who was a very great scholar long before he became a Christian, could say that in the Greek philosophers he found a parallel to almost all the teaching of Christianity; but one thing, he said, he never found, “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” Celsus, who attacked the Christians with such vigour towards the end of the second century A.D., wrote, “God is good and beautiful and happy and is in that which is most beautiful and best. If then ‘He descends to men’ it involves change for him, and change from good to bad, from beautiful to ugly, from happiness to unhappiness, from what is best to what is worst. Who would choose such a change? For mortality it is only nature to alter and be changed; but for the immortal to abide the same forever. God would never accept such a change.” To the thinking Greek the incarnation was a total impossibility. To people who thought like that it was incredible that one who had suffered as Jesus had suffered could possibly be the Son of God.’ (DSB)

‘When we wonder why the language of traditional Christianity has lost its liberating power for nuclear man, we have to realize that most Christian preaching is still based on the presupposition that man sees himself as meaningfully integrated with a history in which God came to us in the past, is living under us in the present, and will come to liberate us in the future. But when man’s historical consciousness is broken, the whole Christian message seems like a lecture about the great pioneers to a boy on an acid trip.’ (Henri Nouwen in The Wounded Healer)

1Co 1:24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

Those whom God has called – ‘Here, as is usual in Paul’s writings, “called” has the thought of effectual calling. It is implied that the call has been heeded and obeyed.’ (Leon Morris) Only an omnipotent, effectual call could overcome the deep prejudice felt by Jew and Gentile alike.

‘Because of Paul’s deeply rooted conviction about the sovereignty of God and the prevenient nature of grace, he may well have in mind an intentional contrast between lost mankind who “demand” and “look for” (1:22) and the saints who are called and can only respond to God’s initiative.’ (College Press)

‘The Jews desired an exhibition of power; the Greeks sought wisdom: both are found in Christ, and in the highest degree. He is the power of God and the wisdom of God. In his person and work there is the highest possible manifestation both of the divine power and of the divine wisdom. And those who are called not only see, but experience this. The doctrine of Christ crucified produces effects on them which nothing short of divine power can accomplish. And it reveals and imparts to them the true wisdom…It does infinitely more than human wisdom could ever conceive, much less accomplish. It has already changed the state of the intelligent universe, and is to be the central point of influence throughout eternity.’ (Charles Hodge)

‘God thus puts his people in possession of a “salvation, which is at once the mightiest miracle in the guise of weakness and the highest wisdom in the guise of folly.”‘ (Wilson, quoting Edwards)

1Co 1:25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength.

The foolishness of God…the weakness of God – as illustrated in the Cross. If we had been asked to come up with a plan to save the world, we should certainly not have come up with the Cross. But that is what God did, and it works!

‘You cannot at the same time show that Christ is wonderful-and you are clever.’ (James Denney)

Man’s wisdom – ‘To Paul…the wisdom of the world (both Jewish and Greek) seemed to arise clearly out of man’s rebellion against God, his refusal to bow the knee and his determination to make God fit his own ideas and desires. Because God is determined to root out all such human pride, any wisdom is to be rejected which is not based on “Christ crucified” (and on the derivative truths which spring from that gospel, e.g. the essential sinfulness of man and the gracious provision of salvation by a holy and loving Creator God). (Prior)

1Co 1:26 Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth.

They must learn that ‘the things which elevate man in the world, knowledge, influence, rank, are not the things which lead to God and salvation.’ (Hodge)

Not many of you were wise by human standards – Cf. Mt 11:25 At that time Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.”

‘Paul glories in the fact that, for the most part, the Church was composed of the simplest and the humblest people. We must never think that the early Church was entirely composed of slaves. Even in the New Testament we see that people from the highest ranks of society were becoming Christians. There was Dionysius at Athens; {Ac 17:34} Sergius Paulus, the proconsul of Crete; {Ac 13:6-12} the noble ladies at Thessalonica and Beroea; {Ac 17:4,12} Erastus, the city treasurer, probably of Corinth. {Ro 16:23} In the time of Nero, Pomponia Graecina, the wife of Plautius, the conqueror of Britain, was martyred for her Christianity. In the time of Domitian, in the latter half of the first century, Flavius Clemens, the cousin of the Emperor himself, was martyred as a Christian. Towards the end of the second century Pliny, the governor of Bithynia, wrote to Trajan the Emperor, saying that the Christians came from every rank in society. But it remains true that the great mass of Christians were simple and humble folk.’ (DSB)

Selina, Countess of Huntingdon, said she was thankful to God for the letter “m” in 1Co 1:26, that it read, “Not many mighty, not many noble! not “not any.” She gave her last testimony in the glowing words, “I have no hope but that which inspired the dying malefactor at the side of my Lord. I must be saved in the same way, as freely, as fully, or not at all.”

1Co 1:27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.

‘The religious perspective of this verse is one which runs throughout the Scriptures, and Paul’s choice of ideas here was influenced and inspired by the long history of God expressing his sovereign will through his choice of foolish and weak individuals to carry out his agenda. Whether one considers God’s choice of Israel, or of Moses, or of Gideon, or of David, or of Mary the mother of Jesus, the Scripture is clear in its depiction of a God whose list of friends portrays a lot of foolishness and weakness by human standards.’ (College Press)

‘Somewhere about the year A.D. 178 Celsus wrote one of the bitterest attacks upon Christianity that was ever written. It was precisely this appeal of Christianity to the common people that he ridiculed. He declared that the Christian point of view was, “Let no cultured person draw near, none wise, none sensible; for all that kind of thing we count evil; but if any man is ignorant, if any is wanting in sense and culture, if any is a fool let him come boldly.” Of the Christians he wrote, “We see them in their own houses, wool dressers, cobblers and fullers, the most uneducated and vulgar persons.” He said that the Christians were “like a swarm of bats-or ants creeping out of their nests-or frogs holding a symposium round a swamp-or worms in conventicle in a corner of mud.”‘ (DSB)

God’s Tool Chest

Foolish Things 1Co 1:27-29

Weak Things 1Co 1:27-29

Base Things 1Co 1:28-29

Despised Things 1Co 1:28-29

Non-existent Things 1Co 1:28-29

1Co 1:28 he chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things-and the things that are not-to nullify the things that are,

‘It is apparent from the dispensations of grace, that knowledge, rank, and power do not attract the favour of God, or secure from their possessors any pre-eminence or preference before him. This should render the exalted humble, and the humble content.’ (Charles Hodge)

‘Walk the streets by moonlight, if you dare, and you will see sinners then. Watch when the night is dark, and the wind is howling, and the picklock is grating in the door, and you will see sinners then. Go to yon jail, and walk through the wards, and mark the men with heavy overhanging brows, men whom you would not like to meet at night, and there are sinners there. Go to the Reformatories, and note those who have betrayed a rampant juvenile depravity, and you will see sinners there. Go across the seas to the place where a man will gnaw a bone upon which is reeking human flesh, and there is a sinner there. Go where you will, you need not ransack earth to find sinners, for they are common enough; you may find them in every lane and street of every city, and town, and village, and hamlet. It is for such that Jesus died. If you will select me the grossest specimen of humanity, if he be but born of woman, I will have hope of him yet, because Jesus Christ is come to seek and to save sinners. Electing love has selected some of the worst to be made the best. Pebbles of the brook grace turns into jewels for the crown royal. Worthless dross he transforms into pure gold. Redeeming love has set apart many of the worst of mankind to be the reward of the Saviour’s passion. Effectual grace calls forth many of the vilest of the vile to sit at the table of mercy, and therefore let none despair.’ (Spurgeon)

1 Cor 1:29  so that no one may boast before him.

1Co 1:30 It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God-that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption.

Wisdom from God – ‘Christ is the true wisdom. He is the Logos, the Revealer, in whom dwells all the fulness of the godhead, and all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. No man knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son shall reveal him, Joh 1:18. Union with him, therefore, makes the believer truly wise. It secures the knowledge of God, whose glory is revealed in the face of Christ, and whom is eternal life. All true religious knowledge is derived from Christ, and it is only those who submit to his teaching who are wise unto salvation.’ (Charles Hodge)

‘Man’s intellect seeks after rest, and by nature seeks it apart from the Lord Jesus Christ. Men of education are apt, even when converted, to look upon the simplicities of the cross of Christ with an eye too little reverent and loving. They are snared in the old net in which the Grecians were taken, and have a hankering to mix philosophy with revelation. The temptation with a man of refined thought and high education is to depart from the simple truth of Christ crucified, and to invent, as the term is, a more intellectual doctrine. This led the early Christian churches into Gnosticism, and bewitched them with all sorts of heresies. This is the root of Neology, and the other fine things which in days gone by were so fashionable in Germany, and are now so ensnaring to certain classes of divines. Whoever you are, good reader, and whatever your education may be, if you be the Lord’s, be assured you will find no rest in philosophizing divinity. You may receive this dogma of one great thinker, or that dream of another profound reasoner, but what the chaff is to the wheat, that will these be to the pure word of God. All that reason, when best guided, can find out is but the A B C of truth, and even that lacks certainty, while in Christ Jesus there is treasured up all the fulness of wisdom and knowledge. All attempts on the part of Christians to be content with systems such as Unitarian and Broad Church thinkers would approve of, must fail; true heirs of heaven must come back to the grandly simple reality which makes the ploughboy’s eye flash with joy, and gladens the pious pauper’s heart-”Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners.” Jesus satisfies the most elevated intellect when he is believingly received, but apart from him the mind of the regenerate discovers no rest. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge.” “A good understanding have all they that do his commandments.”‘ (Spurgeon)

Righteousness – ‘Those…who are in Christ have divine wisdom or the saving knowledge of God and of divine things; they have a righteousness which secures their justification. There is no condemnation to those that are in Christ Jesus, Ro 8:1. They are renewed after the image of God, and shall finally be presented without spot or blemish before the presence of his glory. And they are partakers of eternal redemption or full deliverance from all the evils of sin, and are introduced into the glorious liberty of the children of God.’ (Charles Hodge)

Holiness – ‘Here Paul refers to that state of holiness which God confers upon believers in Christ, and not to the process of santification in which their co-operation is enlisted.’ (Wilson)

‘We must go back to the Jewish worshippers, and the severe prohibition against coming before God if not purified according to the preparation of the sanctuary; for persons defiled were without access, and debarred from fellowship with Jehovah and other worshippers. But, when sprinkled by the blood of sacrifices, they were re-admitted to the worship. They were then a holy people. The blood of sacrifice was their sole ground of access. Even so, by means of the one ever valid sacrifice of Calvary, sinners exclused on account of sin have access in worship and boldness to approach a holy God. In that sense Christ crucified was made of God to us sanctification.’ (Smeaton)

Redemption – ‘This term sometimes includes all the benefits received from Christ. When he is called our Redeemer he is presented as our deliverer from guilt, from hell, from sin, from the power of Satan, from the grave. But when redemption is distinguished from justification and sanctification, it refers to the final deliverance from evil. The “day of redemption” is the day when the work of Christ shall be consummated in the perfect salvation of his people as to soul and body. Ro 8:23 Eph 1:14 4:30 Heb 9:12.’ (Charles Hodge)

This ‘is the first gift of Christ to be begun in us, and the last to be brought to completion. For salvation begins when we are extricated from the labyrinth of sin and eath. In the meantime however we sigh for the final resurrection day, yearning for redemption, as it is put in Ro 8:26. But if someone asks how Christ has been given to us for redemption, I reply that he made himselfthe price of redemption.’ (Calvin)

‘Diogenes used to complain that men flocked to the oculist and to the dentist but never to the man (he meant the philosopher) who could cure their souls. Jesus Christ can deliver a man from past sin, from present helplessness, and from future fear. He is the emancipator from slavery to self and to sin.’ (DSB)

‘There are three great aspects of the work of Christ which have in turn held the attention of the Church, and come home with special force to its spiritual situation at a special time. There are:

1.  Its triumphant aspect;

2.  Its satisfactionary aspect;

3.  Its regenerative aspect.

The first emphasizes the finality of our Lord’s victory over the evil power of devil; the second, the finality of his satisfaction, expiation, or atonement presented to the holy power of God; and the third the finality of his sanctifying or new-creative influence on the soul of man. The first marked the Early Church, the second the Medieval and Reformation Church, while the third marks the Modern Church. And if you fall back upon the New Testament, where all the subsequent development of the Church is in the germ, as a philosophy might be packed in a phrase, you will find those three strands wonderfully and prophetically entwined in 1Co 1:30, where it is said that Christ is made unto us (2) justification; (3) sanctification; and (1) redemption. The whole history of the doctrine in the Church may be viewed as the exegesis by time of this great text of the Spirit. Now, it is not meant that in the period specially marked by one of these aspects the other two were absent. In various of the medieval theologians you find all three. And it is a good test of the native aptitude of any theologian, and of his evangelical grasp, that he should find them all necessary to express the fullness of the vast work, and its adequacy to anything so great and manifold as the soul. But what we do not find in the classic theologians of the past is the co-ordination of the three aspects under one comprehensive idea, one organic principle, corresponding to the complete unity of Christ’s person, who did the work. We do not find such a unitary view of the work as we should expect when we reflect that it was the work of a personality so complete as Christ, and so absolute as the God who acted in Christ. Yet we must strive after such a view, by the very nature of our faith. A mere composite or eclectic theology means a distracted faith. A creed just nailed together means Churches that cannot draw together. We cannot, at least the Church cannot, rest healthily upon medley and mortised aspects of the one thing which connects our one soul with the one God in one moral world. We cannot rest in unresolved views of reconciliation. As the reconciliation comes to pervade our whole being, and as we answer it with heart and strength and mind, we become more and more impatient of fragmentary ways of understanding it. We crave, and we move, to see that the first aspect is the condition of the second, and the second of the third, and that they all condition each other in a living interaction.’

(P.t. Forsyth, The Work of Christ)

1Co 1:31 Therefore, as it is written: “Let him who boasts boast in the Lord.”

‘The Corinthian church was wracked by party strife because its members were glorifying in men. They were guilty of extolling the human agents through whom they had received their salvation instead of exulting in the Divine author of it, 3:21f.’ (Wilson)

‘We should not overlook the significance of the application to Christ of words which in Jer 9:23-24 refer to Jehovah. No higher view could be taken of the Person of Christ.’ (Leon Morris)

‘It is not the world’s false boasting in its wisdom and ability that caused Paul to write 1 Corinthians, but the same false boasting in the church…,where Christians were glorying in men and wrongly evaluating their gifts. They can only do this because they have forgottenthat their Christian existence depends, not on their merit, but on god’s call and the fact that the Gospel is the message of Christ.’ (Barrett)