Introduction to 1 Corinthians

Photo: The isthmus of Corinth which made the city of Corinth so important militarily, and so prosperous economically. I suspect this photo was taken from the Acrocorinth. [BiblePlaces.com. BiblePlaces.com Image Library. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2009.]

1.  Corinth.  The city to which the Corinthian letters were addressed, and which St Paul first visited and evangelized on his second missionary journey, was not the ancient metropolis by the same name.  The old city, which Cicero called the “light of all Greece” (PRo Lege Manil. 5), was destroyed by the Romans under the generalship of Lucius Mummius in 146 B.C., and lay in complete ruins for an entire century.  In 146 B.C. Julius Caesar laid on the anceint site the foundations of the new metropolis and called it Colonia Julia Corinthus.

In a comparatively short time the new city became nearly as populous and flourishing as the old one had been.  This was due to its remarkable location.  Lying at the southern extremity of the isthmus, about four miles in breadth, that connects the Peloponnesus or lower portion of the Grecian peninsula with the mainland, and fed by the two famous seaport towns, Lechaeum on the west and Cenchrae on the east of the isthmus, Corinth was bound to be, as it had been in the past, a commercial center of highest importance.  Its position was conspicuous on the highway of commerce between the Orient and the Occident, and it was not without reason that the great business thoroughfare of the then-known world passed this way; for all trading between the East and Rome took this route in order to avoid the perilous and more or less continual storms that swept the seas about the southern coast of Greece.  Although inferior to Athens as an intellectual center Corinth was very eminent in this respect also.  It was proud of its many schools of philosophy and rhetoric, as well as the excellence of its architecture.

As might be expected, Corinth was unrivaled in its wealth, in the variety of its population, and in its profligacy.  Being the capital of the Roman Province of Achaia it was the residence of the proconsul, and its political and civil influence was mainly Roman.  Asiatics were also there from Ephesus, and Jews in sufficient numbers to have their synagogues.  And yet, having been Greek in its origin, the city never lost the spirit and customs of its ancestors; its language, its literature and its laws remained Greek.

St Chrysostom pronounced Corinth “the most licentious city of all that are or ever have been.”  During the daytime its streets were packed with peddlers, sodliers and sailors; with foreign and domestic traders, boxers and wrestlers; with idlers, slaves, gamblers and the like.  At night the great metropolis was a scene of drunken revelry and of every kind of vice.  “To live like a Corinthian” was to lead a dissolute and lawless life.  Far from correcting or restraining the shameless immorality of its inhabitants the religion of Corinth only added to it.  Aphrodite Pandemos, the goddess of lust and sinful love, was the guardian deity of the city.  In her temple, professional prostitutes who gave lascivious dances at public festivals, and carnal intercourse with whom was looked upon as a religious consecration.  Little wonder that a city of such gross sensuality should have been filled with defrauders, fornicators, idolators, adulterers, effeminate, liars, thieves, covetous, drunkards, railers and extortioners (1 Cor 6:8-10).  St Paul, from his long residence there, had personal knowledge of conditions as they existed, and hence the vividness and force of the letters he addressed to the faithful of that wicked city.

The ancient site of Corinth possesses now only a miserable town of five churches and a few thousand inhabitants.  Aside from some Doric dolumns, still defying in their massive grandeur the wastes of time, no relic remains of the glories and powers that once were gathered there.  The site of the old city is no so desolate because, not only has it been repeatedly plundered since ancient days, but in the year 1858, after a destructive earthquake, it was largely abandoned, and a new city by the same name was built on the west of the isthmus on the Corinthian gulf.

2. The Foundation of the Church in Corinth. Leaving Athens on his second missionary journey St Paul came to Corinth, perhaps around the year 52.  He found lodging and means of support with Aquila and Priscilla (also called “Prisca”), a Jewish man and wife who with other Christians and Jews had recently been expelled from Rome by the edict of Claudius (Suetonius, Claud. XXV; Acts 18:2).  Like Paul himself this couple were tent-makers.  The Apostle worked at his trade in their home during the week, and every Sabbath they were hearers of his preaching in the synagogue, being converts and devote Christians.  Silas and Timothy arrived without delay from Macedonia (Acts 17:14); and, encouraged by their presence, St Paul redoubled his efforts in declaring to the Jews that Christ was the Messiah (Acts 18:5).  This preaching, however, was shortly resented in the synagogue, and the Apostle in disgust turned from the Jews saying, “Your blood be upon your own heads: I am clean; from henceforth I will go to the Gentiles” (Acts 18:6).  Departing from the synagogue he enetered into the near-by house of a pagan convert named Titus Justus.  With him went also Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, and all his family, besides Aquila and Priscilla.  Soon they were joined by such influential persons as Chloe, Stephanus, Gaius and Erastus, the treasurer of the city.  Many more, doubtless, especially from the poorer classes, formed a part of this group of the first faithful of Corinth.  St Paul remained there for eighteen months.  So successful was his preaching and so great was the progress of the new Christian community that the Jews, being enraged, stirred up a great persecution against the Apostle and forcefully brought him before the judgment-seat of the Roman proconsul Gallio, who was the brother of Seneca, the famous philosopher.  Being little concerned about their religious controversies and disputes Gallio dismissed the Jews almost with contempt.  St Paul then continued his work in Corinth for some time, until he was ready to return to the Orient.  Aquila and Priscilla accompanied him from Greece to Ephesus, where they remained, while he went up to Jerusalem.  From Ephesus Apollo, a new convert to Christianity, was sent to Corinth to continue Paul’s work there (Acts 18:26 ff.).  Later on the Apostle himself returned to Greece and certainly must have visited Corinth (Acts 20: 2-3), but on this occasion he was probably engaged chiefly in collecting alms for the poor of Jerusalem.  It seems very likely that he also paid a visit to the Corinthians during his long stay at Ephesus on his third misionary journey (2 Cor 12:14; 13:1).  Some, with Cornely, think that after his arraignment before Gallio St Paul made the journey to Illyricum, and upon his return to Corinth tarried the “many days” spoken of in Acts 18:18.

St Peter also perhaps preached in Corinth; at least he had many followers there (1 Cor 1:12; cf. Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. ii. 24).

While it is clear that the Church of Corinth included among its members some Jews, such as Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, Aquila and Priscilla and others, it is also certain that the majority of Christians there were of Gentile origin.  Many of these were Romans, as we gather from their Latin names (1 Cor 1:14, 16; 16:15, 17; Rom 16:21-23; Acts 18:8, 17), but a number were also of Greek descent.  Among the various converts soem were of noble birth, wealthy and learned; but by far the greater number were poor and unlettered (1 Cor 1:26).  Slaves also there were (1 Cor 7:21), and those who aforetime had been addicted to hateful crimes (1 Cor 6:9-11).  It was a mixed community of Jews and Gentiles, learned and ignorant, slave and free; but the majority were of pagan origin and belonged to the poorer classes.

St Paul wrote at least three letters to the Corinthians, the first of which (1 Cor 5:9) has not come down to us.  The other two give us a pretty thorough insight into the moral and religious condition of the Corinthian Church.

3. Occasion and Purpose of this Letter. After St Paul had left Ephesus on his way to Jerusalem at the close of his second missionary journey, an Alexandrian Jew of great eloquence by the name of Apollo came to Ephesus and began to teach “diligently the things that are of Jesus” (Acts 18:25).  But Aquila and Priscilla, seeing that Apollo was not well instructed in the faith, knowing only the baptism of John, “took him to them, and expounded to him the way of the Lord more diligently” (Acts 18:26).  When they had thus imparted sufficient instruction and had doubtless baptized him, they wrote to the faithful of Corinth, whither he desired to go, to receive him.  Arrived in Corinth, Apollo preached the Gospel with his usual power, convincing the Jews that Jesus was the Christ (Acts 18:27-28).  So extraordinary was his eloquence and his knowledge of the Scripture that he made a much more striking appeal to certain of the educated classes among the Corinthians, who loved philosophy and rhetoric, than St Paul, the founder of the Church, had made.  These pursuers of earthly wisdom and lovers of the Old Testament Scriptures soon began to institute odious comparisons between Paul and Apollo.  The latter, unlike the former, they said, was a man of eloquence (1 Cor 1:17; 2:4-5, 13), he was practiced in the rules and art of rhetoric (2 Cor 11:6), he had the physique and appearance of an orator (2 Cor 10:10).  As for St Paul, besides lacking all these qualities, his very Apostolate was questionable, since he had not been among the original disciples of Jesus (1 Cor 9:1), his authority was inferior to the twelve (1 Cor 9:5-6), and his doctrine different from theirs (Gal 2:7-13).

About the same time there came to Corinth Judaizers, perhaps from Antioch, who had heard St Peter preach, or had been converted by him, and who therefore, as belonging to the Prince of the Apostles, considered themselves superior to the Corinthians.  They regarded Paul and Apollo, with their respective followers, as of inferior rank in the Church, and accused them of believing and preaching doctrines offensive to the Jews which had not the approbation of St peter and the other primitive Apostles.  Those among the faithful of Corinth who were of Jewish origin were naturally influenced by these teachings of their fellow-countrymen, and it was only a short time when a Judaizing party was formed that declared Cephas to be their patron.  We need not suppose that St Peter preached at Corinth, as did Apollo; and yet it is indeed possible that, passing through there on his journeys east or west, he did so.

It would seem there was still another faction in Corinth whose adherents pretended to belong not to Paul, nor to Apollo, nor to Peter, but only to Christ (1 Cor 1:12).  On what the superior boast of these Christians was based it is difficult to say.  Had they seen Christ here on earth in the flesh, and received their call to the faith directly from Him?  Were they Judaizers who, in their love for the obedience to the Law of Moses, claimed to imitate our Lord more strictly than others?  Or had they some special gifts of the Spirit which put them in more intimate communication with the Savior?  These are some of the conjectures which scholars have made to determine the character of those who protested that they were of the party of Christ (cf. Jacquier, Hist. des Livres du N. T., tom I, p. 115; Fillion, h. 1.; Lemonnyer, h. 1.).  Nevertheless Cornely, Le Camus and others hold that there were only three factions at Corinth, and consequently that the words, “I of Christ” (1 Cor 1:12), do not represent a distinct faction, but rather those right-minded Christians who kept aloof from all divisions and dissensions.  This opinion is now considered more probable, especially in view of the fact that St Paul nowhere condemns a fourth party, but on the contrary (1 Cor 3:22-25), when speaking of the three factions mentioned above, declares that all the faithful belong to Christ.

With reference to the various factions at Corinth, it is to be observed that there was no essential difference between them, as seems clear from 1 Cor 4:6, and as commentators admit.  Moreover, the Apostle’s words in this Epistle show that the several groups there was not a question of Doctrine, but only of preference for the different teachers of one and the same faith.  It was the relation which exists between every disciple and his master.  In the second letter, however, we see the division between Pauline and Judaizing Christians later became so marked as to threaten a real schism (2 Cor 10-13).  Still, even in the beginning these minor disputes and dissensions could not escape producing a general relaxation of authority and discipline.  (a) In consequence a grave social scandal had taken place, and the Corinthians had passed over it without notice (1 Cor 5:1-2).  Their difference of opinion on various subjects had led to open quarrels, and these in turn to lawsuits, even before heathen tribunals (1 Cor 6: 1 ff.; 7:1 ff.; 8:1 ff).  They thus gave the impression to the outside world of mistrusting and hating, rather than of loving one another.  (b) At the public assemblies of the faithful women appeared with uncovered heads, and insisted on the right to speak and to teach (1 Cor 11:3 ff.).  (c) The celebration of the Eucharistic mysteries had become an occasion of disgraceful disorders and shameful conduct (1 Cor 11:17 ff.).  (d) The special endowments of the Holy Spirit, so plentifully distributed in those early times, were often abused and made a pretext for pride and uncharitableness towards those who had not been favored with them.  And even among those who possessed these divine gifts there was often manifested such a spirit of rivalry in exercising them that the Christian assembly frequently became an exhibition of fanatical frenzy and irreligious antagonism (1 Cor 12:1 ff.; 14:1 ff.).  (c) Besides these disorders there were other difficulties and disputes demanding solution, such as the resurrection of the dead, the condition of the risen body, ect. (1 Cor 15:1 ff.).

A knowledge of Corinthian conditions came to St. Paul during his three years' sojourn at Ephesus on his third missionary journey. Corinth and Ephesus were only some 250 miles apart, and the distance could be covered under ordinary conditions in less than a week. Travelers were constantly going from the one city to the other, except perhaps in the winter time. Accordingly, from the household of a lady named Chloe (1 Cor 1:11) the Apostle learned of the divisions and dissensions among the Corinthians. Apollo, who visited him at Ephesus (1 Cor 16:12), as well as the three legates of the Corinthian Church who came to him there (1 Cor 16:17) must have informed him very thoroughly regarding conditions among the faithful of Corinth. Moreover, the Apostle had written a letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor 5:9) which has been lost to us, but which at the time caused a number of misunderstandings and provoked not a few questions relative to marriage and celibacy, the eating of meats offered to idols, ect. (1 Cor 7:1 ff.; 8:1 ff.), that were submitted to him in reply.  The purpose of this present letter was therefore (a) to denounce and correct the existing abuses among the Corinthians; (b) to answer the questions and difficulties that had been referred to St Paul by letter.

It may be asked if there were not local superiors, a Bishop and some priests in the Corinthian Church?  And if so, why they did not attend to the matters treated in this letter?  In reply we may say first that St Paul had doubtless provided local superiors for Corinth, just as years before he had appointed “presbyters” in all the Churches he had founded in Asia Minor (Acts 14:22; 20:17; Phil 1:1; 1 Thess 5:12; Tit 1:5).  As to the other question we must remember that the local superiors at Corinth, like the Church itself, were very young and inexperienced and perhaps found it difficult to deal with so many and such grave matters as were demanding solution.  They felt the need of appealing to the infallible authority of the Apostle, and in all probability it was these local superiors themselves who replied to the lost Corinthian letter of St Paul (1 Cor 5:9), and who, consequently, were the immediate occasion and the first recipients of this present Epistle.  This letter was sent to the Church through the local superiors at Corinth, and hence the existence and authority of those superiors is not mentioned, but taken for granted.

4. Date and Place of Writing. From 1 Cor 16:8 it is clear that this letter was written at Ephesus; and from 1 Cor 16:5, where there is a question of a proximate visit to Macedonia, it is also clear that it was written toward the end of the Apostle’s sojourn in Ephesus on his third missionary journey, very probably in the spring of the year 57; for it was about this time that Timothy and Erastus were sent to Macedonia (Acts 19:22), just shortly before the tumult stirred up by Demetrius (Acts 19:23 ff.), following which St Paul left Asia.  That the Epistle was written around Paschal time also seems very probable from the allusions in it to the Pasch, to unleavened bread (5:6-7; 15:20, 23; 16:15), and to the Resurrection of Christ (15:4, 12).  Cornely thinks it was written in 58.  The exact time depends on the date assigned to the close of St Paul’s stay in Ephesus on his third missionary journey, and since this cannot be fixed with entire certainty and precision, the date given for the writing of the Epistle can be only approximate.

The Epistle was probably carried to Corinth by the delegates who had come from there to Ephesus, namely Stephanus, Fortanatus and Achaicus.  This is according to the note attached to the end of the letter in the Received Text.  That Timothy could not have delivered the letter to the Corinthians, as some have said, seems evident from the fact that he had departed for Macedonia before it was completed.

5. Authenticity and Canonicity. The authenticity of this Epistle has been so universally accepted by critics of practically every school that it seems hardly necessary to cite arguments in proof of it.  Even the German Rationalists of the Tubingen School admitted as genuine the Epistles to the Corinthians, the Romans and the Galatians.  A few minor objections to 1 Corinthians have in recent times been raised by such Rationalists as Bruno Baur, Nabor, Pierson and Loman; but they are too insignificant to merit any serious attention.  It will be sufficient, therefore, to give some of the principle proofs for its genuineness and canonicity.

(a) External proofs.  This Epistle was certainly known to the earliest ecclesiastical writers.  Clement of Rome, who was the friend and companion of St Paul (Phil 4:3), and later Bishop of Rome (Euseb., Hist. Eccl. 111. 4), in his first letter to the Corinthians (47:1-3) wrote about the year 98 as follows: “Take up the Epistle of the blessed Apostle Paul.  What did he write to you at the time when the Gospel first began to be preached?  Truly, under the inspiration of the Spirit, he wrote to you concerning himself and Cephas, and Apollo, because even the parties had been formed among you,” etc.  Polycarp, the disciple of St John the Evangelist, in his letter to the Philippians (11:2) cites 1 Cor 6:2, attributing it directly to St Paul: “Do we not know that the saints shall judge the world, as Paul teaches.”  The enumeration of the vices of the Philippians given by Polycarp in the same letter is exactly parallel with 1 Cor 6:9-10, and terminates with the very words of the Apostle: “They shall not possess the Kingdom of God.”  In the Greek edition of the letters of St Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch (circa 98-117), there are many quotations from this Epistle.  St Irenæus, Bishop of Lyons and a disciple of Polycarp, cites (Adv. Haer. 111. 11, 9; 18, 2) the Epistle over sixty times, often observing that it is the work of St Paul and was written to the Corinthians.  Clement of Alexandria (Pædag. 1. 6) and Tertullian (De rusur. mort. 18) also cites 1 Corinthians a great number of times, and frequently by name.  Many other authorities might be given in proof of the authorship of this Epistle, but it will be sufficient to add that it was also admitted as authentic by Basilides, Marcion and other heretics of the first centuries.

(b) Internal proofs.  Even a casual examination of the nature and contents of the present Epistle shows beyond question that it was written by St Paul.  Its historical facts and dogmatic teaching, its peculiarity of language and style, the manner in which it refers to the Old Testament, the characteristic way in which arguments are developed, beginning with general principles and coming to particular conclusions, the personal touches which it bears on every page,-all prove conclusively that it could not have been written by anybody except the Apostle Paul.  Moreover, all that we otherwise known of St Paul and of Corinth we find to be in perfect agreement with the information furnished by this Epistle.  As Charles Baur has said (Der Apostel Paulus, Stuttgart, 1845, vil. I, p. 260), “this letter is tis own guarantee of authenticity; for more than any other writing of the New Testament, it carries us to the living midst of the a Church in formation and gives us an inner view of the development of the new life called forth by Christianity.”

6.  Style and Language. Of all the Epistles of St Paul this one is perhaps the most distinguished for its simplicity and clarity, and for the beauty and variety of its figures of speech.  The kind and number of subjects with which the apostle deals in this lettter surely accounts in great part for the pleasing qualities of his language, but doubtless therre was also a desire to prove to the Corinthians that he was not by any means so rude and ungifted in the use of speech as they may have concluded from his presence among them.  Of course this letter, although much more logical than some other Pauline Epistles, is far inferior to Romans in argumentative force.  In the latter Epistle there was question of establishing a great thesis and of unfolding the essence of his preaching.  The present letter, on the whole, also comes far short of Second Corinthians in impassioned and sustained e, in anxiety for the spiritual welfare of his imperiled converts, in sterness and vehemence of feeling, in biting sarcasm, and in the general roll of his thunder peals against the enemies who would destroy his Apostolic authority and the fruits of his heroic life and labors; and yet the grace and polish of the diction here is far superior to theat of 2 Corinthians, and to many authoriteis this Epistle excels the other in the uniform loftiness of its eloquence (see Introd. to 2 Corinthians, 4-5).

This letter contains over 100 words not found in any other of the Pauline letters, and about the same number which occur nowhere else in the New Testament.  There is a general regard for the rules of syntax, anc comparatively few of the sudden digressions and unfinished phrases so frequent in Second Corinthians.  If certain words are employed too frequently for good taste, we can only say that this is a consequence of St Paul’s principle never to hesitate to repat the same word so long as it expressed his meaning. 

7.  Doctrinal Importance. In point of doctrine the First Epistle to the Corinthians is unexcelled by any other of St Paul’s letters.  The unusual variety of the subjects treated mainly accounts for this.  Practically every verse conveys some dogmatic or moral truth, as will appear in the exegetical treatment that follows.  It will be enough here to point out the principle doctrines to which the Epistle refers, or which it discusses: (a) Baptism (1:13-14); (b)excommunication (5:3-5); (c) ecclesiastical tribunals (6:2-5); (d) the states of matrimony and celibacy (7:1-40); (e) the signification of Holy Communion (10:16-17); (f) the institution and celebration of the Eucharist (11:23-34);  (g) the unity of the Church of which Christ is the head and the faithful the members (12:4-27); (h) the various ministries in the Church (12: 28-29); (i) the virtue of charity (13); (j) public worship, prayer, preaching, prophecy (14); (k) the Resurrection of Christ (15:4-7); (l) the general resurrection, the glorified bodies, the future life (15:25-58).

8. Division and Analysis. In this Epistle we distinguish three main parts: an Introduction (1 Cor 1:1-9), a Body (1 Cor 1:10-15:58), and a Conclusion (1 Cor 16).

1.  The introduction contains: [a] the salutation of St Paul and his “brother” Sosthenes to the Church at Corinth and to all those who call upon the name of the Jesus Christ (1 Cor 1:1-3); [b] and expression of thanksgiving to God for the gifts of speech and knowledge accorded the Corinthians, and a hope of their final perseverance, founded on the faithfulness of God and their communion with Jesus Christ (1 Cor 1:4-9).

2.  The Body of the Epistle falls naturally into two divisions, of which the first (1 Cor 1:10-6:20) reprehends the vices of the Corinthians, and the second, (1 Cor 7:1-15:58) replies to their letter and questions. 

A. The First Part of the Body of the letter, also composed of two parts, condemns first the divisions in the Corinthian Church (1 Cor 1:10-4:21), and secondly the moral disorders among the faithful at Corinth.  

There ought to be unity in the Church, but it is a fact that there are divisions among the faithful (1 Cor 1:10-12).  These factions are most injurious to the Church of which Christ is the center and head (1 Cor 1:13-17a).  The fact that the Gospel was preached in simplicity to the Corinthians should not be a cause of dissension or disagreement, because God’s message is not after the manner of human conceptions, but according to divine wisdom (1 Cor 1:17b-3:4).  Preachers of the Gospel are simply ministers and instruments of God and must render an account of their stewardship (1 Cor 3:5-17).  The faithful, therefore, ought not to glory in this or that preacher, but in God alone: He only is the judge of His ministers (1 Cor 3:18-4:6).  Humility is necessary in preachers of the Gospel (1 Cor 4:7-13).  St Paul has suffered much for the faithful, and they should imitate him (1 Cor 4:14-16).  The Apostle is sending Timothy to visit the Corinthians and he himself will come shortly (1 Cor 4:17-21).

  Following upon their lack of unity, moral disorders and relaxation of religious discipline set in among the Corinthians,  The faithful should have put out of their number the incestuous man, whom St Paul now excommunicates (1 Cor 5:1-5).  That case was a cause of grave scandal; the Corinthians should remember the warning contained in the Apostle’s first letter, to avoid sinners (1 Cor 5:6-13).  Disputes among Christians should not be carried to heathen courts; those who are the cause of such lawsuits shall receive a severe judgment (1 Cor 6:1-11).  All things lawful are not expedient; the faithful must fly from the sin of fornication. 

 B. The Second Part of the Body of the letter (1 Cor 7:1-15:58) replies to the questions and the doubts raised by the Corinthians.

 Matrimony and its use are perfectly lawful (1 Cor 7:1-9).  Marriage is indissoluble (1 Cor 7:10-24). The state of celibacy is more excellent than that of matrimony (1 Cor 7:25-40).

With regard to meats offered to idols it is to be noted that such meats are not bad in themselves, although it may necessary to avoid them on account of scandal (1 Cor 8:1-13).  On account of the danger of scandal, the apostle says it is sometimes necessary to forego one’s rights, as he himself did in refusing support from the faithful (1 Cor 9:1-18).  He suffered countless privations and made many sacrifices for the salvation of souls (1 Cor 9:19-23).  Thus also should the Corinthians be willing to make sacrifices in order to save their souls (1 Cor 9:24-27).  Many benefits received from God are no guarantee that we shall be saved (1 Cor 10:1-13).  Therefore, all things being considered, the faithful should take no part in sacrifices offered to idols; we cannot be on the side of God and of His enemies at the same time (1 Cor 10:14-22).

 At the public services of the Church women should have their heads covered, as is evident from various considerations (1 Cor 11:2-16).  All disorders and unseemly conduct are especially out of place at the Eucharistic celebration (1 Cor 11:17-22).  The institution of the Lord’s Supper, and the manner in which it should be observed (1 Cor 11:23-34).

 The Corinthians have abused their spiritual gifts, allowing them to become an occasion of pride and envy.  The extraordinary gifts which the faithful enjoy come from God.  They should not be a source of discord, since they all come from the same Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:1-11).  The faithful are all members of the same spiritual body; and hence they who possess lesser gifts should not envy those who are blessed with greater ones; and, on the other hand, those who are more highly favored should not despise their more humble brethren (1 Cor 12:12-30).  While each one ought to be content with the gifts he has, it is not forbidden to desire the better ones (1 Cor 12:31).  The most excellent of all the gifts and virtues is charity, without which everything else is as nothing (1 Cor 13:1-3).  The nature of charity; it endures forever (1 Cor 13:4-13).  Of the gifts of tongues and prophecy the latter is more excellent, because more useful to the faithful and to unbelievers as well (1 Cor 14:1-26).  Some practical directions are necessary with regard to the use of the various spiritual gifts (1 Cor 14:27-36).  St Paul observes that he is speaking with divine authority (1 Cor 14:37-40).

 Regarding the resurrection of the dead St Paul affirms its truth and reality, proving it first from the Resurrection of Christ (1 Cor 15:1-28), and then from a practice of some of the faithful and from his own life and sufferings (1 Cor 15:29-34).  Next the manner of the resurrection and the qualities of the glorified bodies are explained (15:35-50).  The just shall be transformed at the coming of Christ (1 Cor 15:51-53).  The victory of Christ over death (1 Cor 15:54-58).

 3.  The Conclusion of the Epistle (1 Cor 1:16) treats [a] of the collection to be made for the poor in Jerusalem (1 Cor 16:1-4); [b] of the Apostle’s forthcoming visit (1 Cor 16:5-9); [c] of the welcome that should be extended to Timothy and Apollo (1 Cor 16:10-12); [d] of the necessity of earnestness and love (1 Cor 16:13-14); [e] of the charity and gratitude the Corinthians ought to show towards their delegates Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (1 Cor 16:15-18).  The Epistle closes with a greeting, a warning and a blessing (1 Cor 16:19-24).