1 Corinthians 1:10-18 Commentary

This Sunday’s Epistolary Lesson’s opening plea almost sounds like it might have been clipped out of a 2026 church newsletter, denominational communication or Christian magazine. In verse 10, after all, Paul writes: “I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say [auto legete*] and that there be no divisions [schismata] among you, but that you be perfectly united [katertismenoi] in mind and thought.”

Preachers might note a couple of things about this plea that seems both so extraordinary in its nature and unrealistic in Christians’ response to it. First and perhaps foremost, Paul grounds his plea for God’s people’s unity dia tou onamatos to Kyriou hemon Iesou Christou (“in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ”). This shows that the apostle’s plea for harmony is neither strictly his idea nor just a suggestion. By offering it in the Lord Jesus Christ’s name, he adds Christ’s imprimatur, his seal of approval. Paul views Christian unity not as an option, but God’s command.

What’s more, preachers might note, the unity Paul envisions and for which he pleads is comprehensive. Paul doesn’t just beg Corinth’s Christians to agree with each other in what they say. He also pleads that they be completely united in the way they think about things. The Message paraphrases verse 10 as Paul’s demand that Jesus’ Corinthian friends “get along with each other … [and] learn to be considerate of one another, cultivating a life in common.”

Previous commentaries on this Sunday’s Epistolary Lesson have explored the apostle’s call for Christian unity. Preachers looking for another “onramp” to it, however, might consider letting the Spirit point us to verse 18’s “The message of the cross is foolishness [moria] to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.”

The primary foolishness of the cross to those who are perishing is, of course, the absurdity of the idea that anyone could be rescued by one person willingly sacrificing his life for those who make us his enemies. In addition, the primary power of the cross is the rescue that God graciously effects through Christ’s self-sacrifice.

But preachers might go on to ask if verse 18 is at least loosely connected to verse 10’s plea for Christian unity. Following the promptings of the Holy Spirit, preachers might explore with our hearers whether the “foolishness” of which Paul speaks in verse 18 speaks to the divisions that plague the Church and Jesus’ followers. Preachers might, what’s more, ask if the “power” of that same cross impacts the unifying work of the crucified but risen and ascended Savior.

Verses 11-13 strongly suggest that Corinth’s Christians thought of both the idea of Christian unity and Paul’s call to it to be utterly silly. “My brothers and sisters,” the apostle grieves there, “some from Chloe’s household have informed me there are quarrels [erides] among you.” In other words, Paul mourns that instead of agreeing with each other in what they say, his Corinthian readers are speaking to each other harshly. Rather than uniting in heart and mind, they are bickering with each other.

In verse 12 the apostle suggests that these arguments stem from misplaced loyalties: “One of you says, ‘I follow Paul [eimi Paulou]’; another, ‘I follow Apollos’; another, ‘I follow Cephas’; still another, ‘I follow Christ’.” Jesus always calls his adopted brothers and sisters to follow him (cf. John 1:43). However, Jesus’ Corinthian friends were following some of Jesus’ other friends. They thought of themselves as belonging not to our Lord Jesus Christ, but to some of his followers.

Verse 13 implies that questions logically arise from such misplaced loyalty. “Is Christ divided [mesmeristai]?” Paul asks there. This echoes verse 10’s plea to the Corinthians not to be divided. By quarreling with each other, they’re acting as if Christ can be divided – which, of course, he can’t be. In fact, they are dividing that part of the Body of Christ that is the Corinthian church and, by extension, Christ’s worldwide Church.

The apostle goes on to ask two more rhetorical questions: “Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul?” In doing so, the apostle implies some of Jesus’ Corinthian friends are acting as if they follow Paul by effectively implying he was crucified for them and being baptized in his name. But, of course, it was the Lord Jesus Christ who was both crucified for Jesus’ followers and in whose name they were baptized.

Preachers want to continue to listen very carefully to the Spirit’s voice as we contemplate the implications of this Sunday’s Epistolary Lesson. Previous commentaries on this website as well as other commentaries explore some of them. Yet preachers might also consider making some of the following observations.

While all of God’s adopted children seek to follow Jesus Christ, some Christians might wonder if we don’t also “follow” at least the teaching of people like Martin Luther, John Calvin or John Wesley. Here it may help to note that the Greek phrase English translations generally render as “follow” more literally means “of.” It suggests that some of Jesus’ Corinthian friends weren’t just following people like Paul but also thought of themselves as almost “belonging to” people like Apollos or Cephas. We, however, know that we belong to our faithful Saviour Jesus Christ alone.

Paul’s accusations of division and divisiveness have echoes in some of the stances some Christians of all persuasions take toward each other in regard to theological and political questions. Americans have been recently mourning the of the life of someone who was protesting the United States’ immigration policies and actions. American Christians are, what’s more, quarreling with each other about the lawfulness of some of law enforcement members’ actions.

Among the things that deeply divide members as well as former members of the denomination in which I am ordained are deeply divided about a Christian understanding of human sexuality. We are divided rather than united in thought and mind whether the Scriptures allow for things like same-sex marriage.

Those (as well as countless other divisions among Jesus’ followers) help remind us that Paul’s call to Christian unity is prescriptive rather than descriptive. He’s not describing the unity that already exists among God’s dearly beloved people of every time and place. The apostle is describing the complete unity of mind and thought that does not yet exist but for which God so deeply longs.

This might lead preachers to let the Spirit guide us in thinking about just what Paul means by katertismenoi en tou autou noi kai en te aute gnome (“perfectly united in mind and thought”). Is the apostle calling Christians to completely and wholeheartedly agree with each other on specific issues like universal health care and women’s ordination? Or is he begging for a slightly different kind of Christian unity?

I suspect that Christians on this side of heaven’s curtain will never agree on some of the political and theological issues that most vex us. But the Spirit does equip us to be perfectly united in mind and thought on God’s creation of all human beings in God’s image and God’s passionate longing for the very best for all God’s image-bearers.

The fact is, however, we naturally fail to clear even that relatively “low bar” of unity. Perhaps, then, preachers might close by summoning Jesus’ friends to invest more energy in cultivating Christian unity than in fomenting divisions among God’s dearly beloved people. We might even find ways to summon our hearers to look for ways to display and express our unity in Christ through our work and worship with even brothers and sisters in Christ with whom we disagree.

*I have here and elsewhere added in brackets the Greek words for the English words the NIV translation uses.

Illustration

Two of our grandchildren attend a local Christian day school. At a meal we recently shared with them our second-grade grandson and kindergarten granddaughter recounted with amazement what had happened at the chapel service for lower school students they’d attended earlier that day.

It seems that as students were sitting down before the service, two third grade students began shouting at each other. According to our grandchildren those students then began pushing and shoving each other. Teachers quickly stepped in and hauled the “combatants” to the principal’s office.

Several things struck me about that story. It seems like a metaphor for both the local and worldwide church. While God summons us to worship the Lord together, our worship sometimes figuratively devolves into shouting and shoving matches.

What’s more, however, when we asked our grandchildren about what they’d learned during the chapel service that morning, they couldn’t answer. They remembered far more completely that day’s students’ fight than its gospel message.