Introduction

The authenticity of this epistle is attested by Clement of Rome (Epistle to the Corinthians, 47), Polycarp (Epistle to the Philippians, 11), Irenaeus (Against Heresies, 4.27.45), Clement of Alexandria (Paidagogos, 1.6.33), and Tertullian (Prescription of Heretics, 33). The city to which it was sent was famed for its wealth and commerce, which were chiefly due to its situation between the Ionian and Aegean Seas on the isthmus connecting the Peloponnese with Greece. In Paul's time it was the capital of the province Achaia and the seat of the Roman proconsul (Acts 18:12). The state of morals in it was notorious for debauchery, even in the profligate heathen world; so much so that "to Corinthianize" was a proverbial phrase for "to live like a Corinthian in the practice of sexual immorality" (Mare); hence, arose dangers to the purity of the church at Corinth, which was founded by Paul on his first visit (Acts 18:1-17).

Paul had been the instrument of converting many Gentiles (12:2) and some Jews (Acts 18:8), notwithstanding the vehement opposition of the countrymen of the latter (Acts 18:5), during the year and a half in which he lived in Corinth. The converts were chiefly of the humbler classes (1:26). Crispus (1:14; Acts 18:8), Erastus, and Gaius were, however, men of rank (Rom. 16:23). A variety of classes is also implied in 11:22. The risk of contamination by contact with the surrounding corruptions and the temptation to a craving for Greek philosophy and rhetoric (which Apollos's eloquent style rather tended to foster, Acts 18:24, etc.) in contrast to Paul's simple preaching of Christ crucified (2:1, etc.), as well as the opposition of certain teachers to him, naturally caused him anxiety. Emissaries from the Judaizers of Palestine boasted of "letters of commendation" from Jerusalem, the metropolis of the faith. They did not, it is true, insist on circumcision in refined Corinth, where the attempt would have been hopeless, as they did among the simpler people of Galatia; but they attacked the apostolic authority of Paul (9:1, 2; 2 Cor. 10:1, 7, 8), some of them declaring themselves followers of Cephas (Peter), the chief apostle, others boasting that they belonged to Christ himself (1:12; 2 Cor. 10:7), while they haughtily repudiated all subordinate teaching. Those persons considered themselves apostles (2 Cor. 11:5, 13). The ground taken by them was that Paul was not one of the Twelve, and therefore not an eyewitness of the gospel facts. Another group avowed themselves followers of Paul himself, but did so in a party spirit, exalting the minister rather than Christ. The followers of Apollos, again, unduly prized his Alexandrian learning and eloquence, to the disparagement of the apostle, who studiously avoided any deviation from Christian simplicity (2:1-5). Among some of this last philosophizing party there may have arisen the Antinomian ("against law") tendency which tried to defend theoretically their own practical immorality; hence their denial of the future resurrection, and their adoption of the Epicurean motto, prevalent in heathen Corinth, "Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die" (15:32)and hence perhaps arose their connivance at the incestuous intercourse kept up by one of the so-called Christian body with his stepmother during his father's life. The household of Chloe informed Paul of many other evils, such as contentions, division, and lawsuits brought against brethren in heathen law courts by professing Christians; the abuse of their spiritual gifts into occasions of display and fanaticism; the interruption of public worship by simultaneous and disorderly ministrations; decorum violated by women speaking unveiled, and so usurping the office of men; and even the Lord's Supper desecrated by greediness and reveling on the part of the participants. Other messengers, also, came from Corinth, consulting him on the subject of (1) the controversy about meats offered to idols; (2) the disputes about celibacy and marriage; (3) the due exercise of spiritual gifts in public worship; (4) the best mode of making the collection that he had requested for the saints at Jerusalem (16:1, etc.). Such were the circumstances which called for the First Epistle to the Corinthians, the most varied in its topic of all the Epistles.

In 5:9 ("I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators") it is implied that Paul had written a previous letter (now lost) to the Corinthians. Probably in it he had also enjoined them to make a contribution for the poor saints at Jerusalem, whereupon they seem to have asked directions as the mode of doing so, to which he now replies (16:2). It also probably announced his intention of visiting them on his way to Macedonia, and again on his return from Macedonia (2 Cor. 1:15, 16), which purpose he changed on hearing the unfavorable report from Chloe's household (16:5-7), for which he was charged with fickleness (2 Cor. 1:17). In the first epistle which we have, the subject of fornication is alluded to only in a summary way, as if he were rather replying to an excuse set up after rebuke in the matter, than introducing it for the first time (Alford). Preceding this former letter, he seems to have paid a second visit to Corinth, for in 2 Corinthians 12:4; 13:1, he speaks of his intention of paying them a third visit, implying he had already visited them twice. (See comments on 2 Cor. 2:1, comments on 13:2; and also on 1:15, 16.) It is hardly likely that during his three years' sojourn at Ephesus he would have failed to revisit his Corinthian converts, which he could so readily do by sea, there being constant maritime access between the two cities. This second visit was probably a short one (16:7) and attended with pain and humiliation (2 Cor. 2:1; 12:21), occasioned by the scandalous conduct of so many of his own converts. His milder censure having then failed to produce reformation, he wrote briefly directing them "not to company with fornicators." On their misapprending this injunction, he explained it more fully in the epistle, the first of the two extant (5:9, 12). See the Introduction to Second Corinthians for comments on the possibility of there having been four epistles: (1) one now lost (referred to in 1 Cor. 5:9), (2) the epistle called "First Corinthians," (3) another epistle written before "Second Corinthians" and now lost, and (4) the epistle called "Second Corinthians."

The place of writing was Ephesus (16:8). At the time of writing, Paul implies (16:8) that he intended to leave Ephesus after Pentecost of that year. He really did leave it about Pentecost (a.d. 55 or 56). Cf. Acts 19:29. The allusion to Passover imagery in connection with our Christian Passover (5:7) makes it likely that the season was around the Passover. Thus the date of the epistle is fixed with tolerable accuracy about Passover, certainly before Pentecost in the third year of his residence at Ephesus, a.d. 55 or 56. (For other arguments, see Conybeare and Howson's The Life and the Epistles of St. Paul.)

The epistle is written in the name of Sosthenes "[our] brother" (1:1). Perhaps he is the same as the Sosthenes in Acts 18:17, who, after the incident recorded there, must have become a Christian and joined Paul. He took no part in writing the epistle itself, for the apostle in the very next verses (1:4ff.) uses the first person. The bearers of the epistle were probably Stephanas, Fortunatas, and Achaicus, whom he mentions (16:17, 18) as being with him then, but who he implies are about to return to Corinth; and therefore he commends them to the Corinthians.

Click on the 'back' button to continue.

Copyright 2000 Gibson Productions