1 Corinthians 1:12

Now this I say that everyone of you saith,.... This the apostle affirms not upon his own personal knowledge, but upon the credit of the report the house of Chloe had made unto him; and his meaning is

Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

Every one here signifieth no more than many of you, or several of you; so : from whence, those that think they have such a mighty argument from , where is the same particle to prove Christ’ s dying for all individuals, may undeceive themselves, and find that they have need of better arguments to prove their assertion. I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ: we may from hence observe, that the divisions amongst the Corinthians were not in matters of faith, but occasioned from their having men’ s persons in admiration. This was probably caused either from God’ s making of Paul the instrument of some of their conversion, Apollos the instrument of others’ conversion, and Peter the instrument of others’ , or else from the difference of their gifts. Of this Apollos we read, ; he was a Jew of Alexandria, who mightily convinced they, and that publicly, and probably was as useful to the Corinthians. One minister of Christ may be justly preferred to another. We ought to honour those most whom God most honoureth, either by a more plentiful giving out of his Spirit, or by a more plentiful success upon their labours; but we ought not so far to appropriate any ministers to ourselves, as for them to despise others. We are not bound to make every minister our pastor, but we are bound to have a just respect for every minister, who by his doctrine and holy life answereth his profession and holy calling.

12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Ver. 12. And I of Christ] q.d. I care neither for Paul nor Apollo, &c. As some say today, they are neither Papists nor Protestants, but Christians, that is, just nothing, flat atheists. Heraclius the emperor being imprudently carried away by some bishops into the opinion of the Monothelites, when that heresy was afterwards condemned by the Council of Jerusalem, the emperor, being ashamed to recant, became a mere neutralist, and held neither one way nor another. And have we not some like-minded among us, who are yet to choose their religion; resolving to resolve on nothing, because (forsooth) there are so many sects and controversies, and such differences in opinion, and contradictions of preachers, therefore they will suspend, serve God (as they call it), and not trouble themselves to know which side hath the better? But these might know, 1. That truth is but one and the same; Christi tunica est unica, Christ’ s coat is seamless, his truth single, and at good agreement with itself. 2. That we have a most sure word, 2 Peter 1:19, sure, and sufficient to perfect the man of God; and that Non est litigiosa iuris scientia sed ignorantia, as the lawyers used to say, it is not too much knowledge, but the ignorance of the Scriptures that begets strife. 3. That God’ s elect have a promise to be taught of God, to be kept from being finally deceived; to be brought to a certainty and full assurance of what they should hold, so evidently and clearly will God by his Spirit speak to their consciences, that they shall hold fast the faithful word, though they cannot answer every cavil and be unmovable as the centre, as Mount Zion that cannot be stirred. Matthew 24:24; John 10:4-5 Job 22:21; 1 Thessalonians 1:5; John 7:17; 1 John 2:20; Psalms 19:7; Proverbs 1:4; Isaiah 52:6; John 6:45.

(12) I of Christ.—It has been suggested that this is not the designation of a fourth party in the Church, but an affirmation by the Apostle, “I am of Christ,” in contradistinction to those referred to before, who called themselves after the names of men. But in addition to the fact that there is no change in form of expression to indicate a change of sense, we find evident traces of the existence of such a party (1 Corinthians 9:1; 2 Corinthians 10:7).

Verse 12. Every one of you saith] It seems from this expression that the whole Church at Corinth was in a state of dissension: they were all divided into the following sects 1. Paulians, or followers of St. Paul; 2. Apollonians, or followers of Apollos; 3. Kephians, or followers of Kephas; 4. Christians, or followers of Christ. See the introduction, sec. v. The converts at Corinth were partly Jews and partly Greeks. The Gentile part, as Dr. Lightfoot conjectures, might boast the names of Paul and Apollos; the Jewish, those of Kephas and Christ. But these again might be subdivided; some probably considered themselves disciples of Paul, he being the immediate instrument of their conversion, while others might prefer Apollos for his extraordinary eloquence. If by Kephas the apostle Peter be meant, some of the circumcision who believed might prefer him to all the rest; and they might consider him more immediately sent to them; and therefore have him in higher esteem than they had Paul, who was the minister or apostle of the uncircumcision: and on this very account the converted Gentiles would prize him more highly than they did Peter. Instead of Christ, χριστου, some have conjectured that we should read κρισπου, of Crispus; who is mentioned 1 Corinthians 1:14. And some think that χριστου, of Christ, is an interpolation, as it is not likely that Christ in any sense of the word could be said to be the head of a sect, or party, in his own Church; as all those parties held that Gospel, of which himself was both the author and the subject. But it is very easy to conceive that, in a Church so divided, a party might be found, who, dividing Christ from his ministers, might be led to say, "We will have nothing to do with your parties, nor with your party spirit; we are the disciples of Christ, and will have nothing to do with Paulians, Apollonians, or Kephians, as contradistinguished from Christ." The reading κρισπου for χριστου is not acknowledged by any MS. or version.

12. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul] The idea of some commentators that there were defined parties in the Apostolic Church under the leadership of Apostles and their Master, a Paul-party, a Peter-party, a Christ-party, is refuted by ch. 1 Corinthians 4:6, where St Paul plainly states that he had replaced the names of the antagonistic teachers at Corinth by that of himself and Apollos, in order to secure his rebukes from assuming a personal form.Apollos] See Acts 18:24-28. From this passage we gather that he was a Hellenistic Greek, of the school of philosophical Judaism which flourished at that time at Alexandria, and was an admixture of the doctrines of the Platonic philosophy with those of the Jewish religion. It is possible that he may have been a disciple of the celebrated Alexandrian teacher Philo, who was contemporary with the Apostles. Learned and zealous, he could not be confined within the bounds of any particular school, but diligently acquainted himself with all the movements which sprang up in the Jewish Church. Thus he became a disciple of John the Baptist, whose doctrines had been widely spread abroad by that time (Acts 19:1-3), and as his fervent spirit was allied with the gift of eloquence, he speedily endeavoured to communicate to others the new light he had received. He is described as being ‘accurately instructed in the things concerning the Lord,’ although he knew ‘only the baptism of John.’ By this we are not to understand a perfect knowledge of the system of Christianity, or it would have been impossible for Aquila and Priscilla to have explained it to him ‘more accurately.’ His knowledge was probably confined to the Baptist’s witness to Christ as the Messiah, to the more general moral teaching of Christ, as contained in the first three Gospels, and to those remarkable glimpses of the inner mysteries of God’s kingdom (see Matthew 3:9; St John 3:27-36, and compare St John 8:39; Romans 2:28-29; Romans 9:7) which our Gospels shew the Baptist to have had. But with that deeper teaching as a whole, confided by Christ to His disciples, and afterwards given to the world in the preaching and writings of the Apostles, and in the Gospel of St John, he had no acquaintance when he came to Ephesus. Endowed with this knowledge through the instrumentality of Aquila and Priscilla, he became an effective preacher of the Gospel, and filling St Paul’s place when the latter had left Corinth, ‘he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, shewing by the Scriptures that Jesus was Christ’ But disgusted possibly by an attempt on the part of some (see note on ch. 1 Corinthians 16:12) to set him up as a rival to St Paul, he left Corinth and returned to Ephesus, and we know not whether he ever visited Corinth again.Cephas] See St John 1:42.

Now this I say - This is what I mean; or, I give this as an instance of the contentions to which I refer. That every one of you saith - That you are divided into different factions, and ranged under different leaders.

12. Now this I say—Now what I mean to say is this. The preceding general report is to be expanded into its particulars. Every—Rather, each one of you.