1 Corinthians 1:16

And I baptized also the household of Stephanas; besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.

The apostle takes up at once the question which caused him the deepest concern in the congregation at Corinth, that of the threatening disruption. He beseeches them, he exhorts them, he most earnestly begs them, as brethren, his brethren and brethren among one another. He bases his pleading upon the soundest foundation: Through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Because the name, the honor, of Jesus is involved in all the actions of the Christians, they must be doubly careful in all their actions. The hallowing of the name of God and of Christ requires that we at all times keep it unstained, unblemished, by any behavior which might bring disgrace to Him. Therefore Paul asks the Corinthians that they all say the same thing; there should be such perfect accord and harmony of sentiment that in their confession of faith before men their agreement may always be voiced. He demands unity for union, not an ignoring of fundamental differences by equivocal confessions. If a creed is purposely so worded as to include or admit both true and false interpretations, it will not aid the cause of Christian harmony. But Paul wants unity and union on the basis of the truth, lest there be among them clefts, splits, schisms, and thus divisions be found among them in spite of the fact that they are united in an outward organization. Instead of that, they should be well and surely adjusted, held together in a bond of perfect unity, in the same discernment and in the same judgment. They should have the proper view of all conditions and circumstances pertaining to the belief and work of the Church, and they should rest their judgment upon this correct understanding; they should form their opinion from the right disposition, Acts 4:32. As the Christians are one heart in the faith, so they should be one mouth in confession. But where there are breaches of opinion, due to false thinking and reasoning, there the perfect interrelation and harmony of all the members of the Church is out of the question.

The apostle now names the witnesses, upon whose testimony he bases his admonition: For it has been made known to me concerning you, my brethren, by them of Chloe that there are personal contentions among you. Paul had received definite information, it had been disclosed to him as a fact. Chloe may have been a freed-woman belonging to the congregation at Ephesus, but also well known in Corinth, the members of whose household had been in the latter city and brought their report from first-hand knowledge. So the apostle knew about the personal wranglings which were threatening to disrupt the Corinthian congregation; for, naturally, the difference of opinion would lead to contentions in the effort to establish various opinions. Note that Paul, in spite of these conditions, yet addresses the Christians at Corinth as his brethren. The apostle says wherein these strifes consisted: But I mean this, I have reference to this fact, that each of you individually says, I am of Paul; but I of Apollos; but I of Cephas; but I of Christ. As the Corinthians saw it in the schools of their heathen philosophers, so they applied it in their pride and self-conceit to the Christian congregation: they formed parties and called themselves after the name of their favorite teacher. Paul had been the first teacher of the Gospel at Corinth, and, as the apostle to the heathen, had preached the truth with all fervor. Next had come Apollos, whose brilliant gifts of oratory had naturally impressed a great many of the members. Both of these teachers undoubtedly emphasized the universality of the grace of God in Christ, as they were obliged to do in order to gain the Gentiles for Christ. But soon came the Judaizing teachers, who wanted the Jewish ceremonial law introduced in all congregations, probably arguing with a great show of plausibility for their position. And while the contention was at its height, a number of members that had not yet been involved formed their own party, sanctimoniously taking their name from Christ Himself and denying to the others true discipleship. The result of the entire quarrel was that each party claimed for itself the only true position and despised all the others. Note that a feature of the movement was the adherence to a name and that it was nourished entirely by party spirit. Not one of them arose in defense of a fundamental principle of Christian truth.

Paul, therefore, takes hold of the matter in no uncertain terms: Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you, or have you been baptized into the name of Paul? A divided Christ means a Christ appropriated in parts, to each one his several bit, in this case in four parts, each faction claiming His truth for itself. Surely that cannot be the intention of the Corinthian Christians; this point they surely did not consider in their wrangling! And the thought foremost in the mind of Paul is that his readers had become members of the Church by faith in the Cross, in the atonement of Christ, which had been sealed to them in Baptism. The very idea as though Paul had been crucified for them is monstrous in his eyes. And the thought as though any of them had been baptized into his name and thus become consecrated to his person, is perfectly abhorrent to his humility. "The fact that Paul puts his name for all the rest proves how ingenuously he was opposed to all this party spirit, and how humbly he was anxious that Christ's name should not be prejudiced through his own. " He could not bear to be placed upon a pedestal by such as did not trust solely in the Gospel preached by him, but made their boast of the dubious distinction that they called themselves after the name of such an excellent preacher.

It is with a feeling of relief that Paul cries out: I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that you were baptized into my name. However, I did baptize also the household of Stephanas but I baptized no one else, so far as I know, vv. 14 -16. Because the very suggestion of a party spirit based upon personal preferences appears horrible and hideous to him, Paul regards it as a veritable dispensation of Providence that so few people had been baptized by him personally in Corinth. Crispus and Gaius had been among his earliest converts, Acts 18:8; Romans 16:23, and now that he thought of it, he remembered also that Stephanas with his entire household had received baptism at his hands; but he could recall no other instance. And this fact, that only so few had been baptized by him personally, is a source of much satisfaction to him, lest anyone should, under the conditions now obtaining in Corinth, bring the accusation against him that his intention had been to bind them to his person and to form a party named after him. Note the deep humility of the great apostle, as well as his carefulness of expression, lest he be under suspicion.