The Harmony Chronicle and Order of the New Testament, Part 2 · 1 Corinthians
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.
He being now at Ephesus, and having set down the time of his removing thence, namely at Pentecost coming, 1 Cor. 16.8. He had now been at Ephesus well towards three years, and had met with many difficulties; yet had so prevailed by the power of the Gospel, that not only all along hitherto many people were continually converted, but even now alate, many conjurers, and such as used magicall arts, devoted themselves to the Gospel and their books to the fire, and became the renewed monuments of the power and prevalency of the divine truth. This was that great and effectuall door opened to him, of which he speaketh, 1 Cor. 16.9. and which occasioned his stay at Ephesus still, when he had sent Timothy and Erastus into Macedonia, Acts 19.21. In the time of which stay there, Stephanas, and Fortunatus and Achaicus, come from Corinth, 1 Cor. 16.17. with Letters from the Church to Paul, 1 Cor. 7.1. and he upon their return, returns his answer in this Epistle sent by Titus and another, 2 Cor. 12.18. Some Postscripts have named Timothy for the bearer, antedating his journey to Corinth, which was not in his going to Mecedon, but in his return back, and when this Epistle had already given them notice of his coming that way, 1 Cor. 16.10.
Apollos when Paul wrote this Epistle was with him at Ephesus, and was desired by Paul to have gone along with the brethren to Corinth, but he would not, 1 Cor. 16.11. it may be because he would not countenance a faction there by his presence, which was begun under his name. The Church was exceedingly broken into divisions, which produced very dolefull effects among them. These severall enormities raged in that Church, though so lately and so nobly planted, and all originally derived from this first mischief of faction and schisme.
1. A member of the Church had married his fathers wife, yea as it seemeth 2 Cor. 7.12. his father yet living: which crime by their own Law and Canons deserved death: For he that went in to his fathers wife was doubly liable to be stoned, both because she was his fathers wife, and because she was another mans wife, whether he lay with her in his fathers life time, or after his death, Talm. in Sanhed. per. 7. & Maym, in Issure biah. per 1. & 2. And yet they in the height of the contestings they had among themselves, did not only, not take away such a wreth from among them, nor mourn for the miscarriage, but he had got a party that bolstered him up and abetted him: and so while they should have mourned they were puffed up. His own party in triumph that they could bear him out against the adverse, and the other in rejoycing that in the contrary faction there was befallen such a scandall. Or both as taking this Libertinism as a new liberty of the Gospel. The Apostle adviseth his giving up to Satan, by a power of miracles which was then in being. So likewise did he give up Hymeneus and Alexander, 1 Tim. 1.20. The derivation of this power we conceived at Act 5. [in the case of Ananias and Saphira] to be from that passage of Christ to the Disciples, Ioh. 20.22. He breathed on them and said, whose sinnes ye retain they are retained, &c. and so were the Apostles indued with a miraculous power of a contrary effect or operation. They could heal diseases and bestow the holy Ghost, and they could inflict death or diseases, and give up to Satan. Now though it may be questioned, whether any in the Church of Corinth had this power, yet when Pauls spirit with the power of the Lord Iesus Christ went along in the action, as Chap. 5.4. there can be no doubt of the effect.
2. Their animosities were so great, that they not only instigated them to common suits at Law, but to suits before the tribunals of the Heathen, which as it was contrary to the peace and honour of the doctrine of the Gospel, so was it even contrary to their Judaick traditions: which required their subjection and appeals, only to men of their own blood, or of their own Religion. The Apostle to rectifie this misdemeanour, first cals them to remember, that the Saints should judge the world, and this he mentioneth as a thing known to them, Chap. 6.2. and it was known to them from Dan. 7.18, 27. And the Kingdom and Dominion, and the greatnesse of the Kingdom shall be given to the people of the Saints of the most high. How miserably this is misconstrued by too many of a fifth Monarchy, when Saints shall only Rule, is to be read in too many miseries that have followed that opinion. The Apostles meaning is no more but this, Do you not know that there shall be a Christian Magistracy? or that Christians shall be Rulers and … the world, and therefore why should you be so fearfull or carelesse to judge in your ow… matters? Observe in what sense he had taken the word Saints in the former verse, name…ly for Christians in the largest sense, as set in opposition to the Heathen. And he speaks in the tenour of Daniel from whence his words are taken, that though the world and Church had been ruled and judged and domineered over, by the four Monarchies which were Heathen, yet under the Kingdom of Christ under the Gospel, they should be ruled and judged by Christian Kings, Magistrates and Rulers. Secondly, he minds them, Know ye not that we shall judge Angels? ver. 3. Observe that he saies not as before, Know ye not that the Saints shall judge Angels? but we. By Angels it is uncontrovertedly granted that he meaneth evil Angels the Devils: Now the Saints, that is all Christians that professed the Gospel were not to judge Devils, but we, saith he, that is the Apostles and Preachers of the Gospel; who by the power of their Ministry ruined his Oracles, Idols, delusions and worship, &c. Therefore he argueth, since there is to be a Gospel Magistracy to rule and judge the world, and a Gospel Ministry that should judge and destroy the Devils, they should not account themselves so utterly uncapable of judging in things of their civil converse, as upon every controversie to go to the Bench of the Heathens to the great dishonour of the Gospel. And withall adviseth them, to set them to judge who were lesse esteemed in the Church, ver. 4. Not that he denieth subjection to the Heathen Magistrate which now was over them, or incourageth them to the usurpation of his power: but that he asserteth the profession of the Gospel, capable of judging in such things, and by improving of that capacity, as farre as fell within their line, he would have them provide for their own peace, and the Gospels credit. We observed before, that though the Jews were under the Roman power, yet they permitted them to live in their own Religion, and by their own Laws to maintain their Religion: and it may not be impertinent to take up and inlarge that matter a little here. As the Jews under the Roman subjection had their great Sanhedrin, and their lesse of three and twenty Judges, as appears both in Scripture, and in their Records, so were not these bare names, or civil bodies without a foul, but they were inlivened by their juridicall, executive power, in which they were instated of old: So that though they were at the disposall of the Roman Power, and Religion, and Laws, and all went to wrack when the Emperour was offended at them, as it was in the time of Caligula, yet for the most part, from the time of the Romans power first coming over them, to the time of their own last Rebellion, which was their ruine, the authority of their Sanhedrins and Judicatories was preserved in a good measure intire, and they had administration of justice of their own Magistracy, as they injoyed their own Religion. And this both within the Land and without, yea even after Ierusalem was destroyed, as we shall shew in its due place. And as it was thus in the free actings of their Sanhedrins, so also was it in the actings of their Synagogues, both in matters of Religion and of civil interest: For in every Synagogue as there were Rulers of the Synagogue in reference to matters of Religion and Divine worship, so were there Rulers or Magistrates in reference to Civil affairs, which judged in such matters. Every Synagogue had Beth din shel sheleshah, a Consistory or Judicatory, or what you will call it, of three Rulers or Magistrates, to whom belonged to judge between party and party in matters of money, stealth, damage, restitution, penalties, and divers other things which are mentioned and handled in both Talmuds in the Treatise Sanhedrin per. 1. Who had not power indeed of capitall punishments, but they had of corporall, namely of scourging to fourty stripes save one. Hence it is that Christ foretels his Disciples, In the Synagogues you shall be beaten, Mark 13.9. and hence had Paul his five scourgings, 2 Cor. 11.24. So that in every Synagogue there were Elders that ruled in Civil affairs, and Elders that laboured in the Word and Doctrine. And all things well considered, it may not be so monstrous, as it seems to some, to say it might very well be so in those times in Christian Congregations. For since, as it might be shewed, that Christ and his Apostles in platforming of the modell of Christian Churches in those times, did keep very close to the platform of the Synagogues: and since the Romans in those times made no difference betwixt Jews in Judaism, and Jews that were turned Christians, nor betwixt those Religions: for as yet there was no persecution raised against Christianity, why might not Christian Congregations have and exercise that double Function of Ministry and Magistracy in them as well as the Jewish Synagogues? And if that much controverted place, 1 Tim. 5.17. should be interpreted according to such a sense, it were neither irrationall, nor improbable. Nor to interpret Paul speaking to such a tenour here. Only his appointing of foreign, the lesse esteemed in the Church ▪ to be appointed for that work is of some scruple: what if it allude to foreign A Committee of private men? of which there is frequent mention among the Hebrew Doctors. See Maymon. in foreign fol. 253. col. 1.
3. It was the old Jewish garb, when they went to pray, to hide head and face, with a vail, to betoken their ashamednesse and confusion of face wherewithall they appeared before God: And hence is the conjunction of these two words so common in their Writings foreign He vailed himself and prayed. And this for a current rule, The wise men and their schollars may not pray, unlesse they be vailed. Maymon. in Tephillah per. 5. To which let us adde that of Sueton. in Vitell. cap. 2. Lucius Vitellius, saith he, had an excellent faculty in flattering: he first set afoot the worshipping of Caius Caesar for a God: when returning out of Syria, he durst not go to him but with his head vailed, and then turning himself about, he fell prostrate.
Again it was the custom of the Jewish women, to go vailed, or their faces covered, whensoever they went into publick. A woman, saith Maymony, may not go into publick foreign if she have not a vail on. In foreign per. 24. And this the Talmudists call this foreign The Iewish Law: and foreign The garb of modesty. Chetubboth per. 7. and Alphes. ibid. Where they say that those women transgresse the Iewish Law that go forth unvailed, or that spin in the streets, or that talk with every man.
Now in this Church of Corinth, the men retained the Jewish custom that they prayed vailed, or with their head and face covered, but the women transgressed their Jewish Law, for they went unvailed and bare faced into the publick Congregation, and their reason was, as it seemeth by the Apostles discourse, because they, in regard of their beauty and comely feature, needed lesse to be ashamed before God in his worship then the men. The Apostle reproves both, and argues that if the man pray vailed, who is the Image and glory of God, then much more should the woman, who is but the glory of the man. But he cries down the mans praying vailed, as dishonouring his head; and exhorts that the woman have power on her head, because of the Angels, cap. 11.10. The word foreign which we observed instantly before, out of Maymony signified a womans vail, doth also signifie power or dominion: and accordingly the Apostle speaketh, Let the woman have power on her head: But what means he by, Because of the Angels? I should answer, Because of the devils: for these he had called Angels also, a few Chapters before, viz. Chap. 6.3. And his words may be construed to this sense, that women should not expose their faces openly in the Congregation, lest the devil make a bait of their beauty, and thereby intangle the eyes and hearts of the men, who should be then better imployed, then gazing and longing after beauty. There are, that by Angels understand the Ministers, and interpret it, that women should be vailed lest the Ministers eyes should be intangled by their faces: which exposition if it be admitted, it may speak for the admission of that also which we give, which provides for the eyes of the whole Congregation as well as of the Ministers.
4. In the same eleventh Chapter he also blameth their disorder in receiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper in the height of their heats and contestations. Wherein they did not only not discern the Lords Body, a Symbole and tie of communion, but they even transgressed that rule now Christians, which those of them that were Jews would not have done in their Judaism. It was then a Canon current, and binding amongst them, that none should eat and drink in their Synagogues, and none should sleep, Jerus. in Megilla fol. 74. col. 1. Maym. in Tephillah per. 11. and Gloss. in Maym. in Shabb. 30. But now as they ate and drank the Bread and the Cup in the Sacrament, in their Churches, and that warrantably, so did they also presume unwarrantably to eat their own common suppers there, and that only in defiance one of another, the rich to outface the poor, and one party another with their good commons; some banketing and feasting to the full, whilest others sat hungry by and looked on. [See how foreign, ver. 21. signifies in the LXX, Gen. 43.34. Cant. 5.1.] Thus did they eat and drink judgement to themselves in the Sacrament, whilest they would receive the symbole of communion and yet shew such signs and evidences of disunion at the very instant: And the Lord accordingly overtook some of them with evident judgements, weaknesse, sicknesse and death, avenging at once upon them the indignity done to his Sacrament, and the indignity done to their brethren. Much like surfeting Nabals case and end.
5. And as the people were thus irregular in this part of worship in their publick assemblies, so were their Ministers faulty in others, namely about the managing of spirituall gifts there. The pretence to the spirit [where indeed it was not] hath alwaies been the great usherer in of all errour and delusion: And to this the very unbeleeving Jews pretended, and often backed their pretences with magicall impostures: and of this the Apostle speaks, Chap. 12.3. No man speaking by the Spirit of God, as these men took on them to do, can call Iesus accursed, as they called him. And on the other hand, some that had spirituall gifts indeed, failed in the using of them to the edification of the Church, but put them forth sometime for their own vainglory: and such was their miscarriage which he taxeth, Chap. 14. They that from that Chapter would ground a preaching by the Spirit now, sure do little observe what they do to build upon an example which the Apostle reproveth: and they inferre from a place much mistaken.
There were indeed the extraordinary gifts of tongues and prophecying in the Church of Corinth, but who had them, and what had they in having them, and how used they them? 1. It was not every or indeed any private member of the Congregation that had them, but the Ministers only, and by these very gifts and imposition of the Apostles hands by which these gifts were conferred, they were inducted into the Ministry and inabled to it. The learned Reader will observe the difference that in ver. 16. is made betwixt him that spake with the tongues, and foreign A private man, that sat by. 2. It was not to gabble with any tongue that is called speaking with a tongue [for to what edification possible could it be for any Minister in Corinth to speak Persick, Coptick, Gallick or any other strange language in that Congregation where all of them understood one and the same language?] but it was to understand and speak the Originals of Scriptures, as was touched before, and to be able to unfold them, and so to prophesie or preach to the people. Observe these passages in the Chapter: He that speaketh with a strange tongue edifieth himself, ver. 4. And, I would you all spake with tongues: Now how could a man edifie himself by speaking in some strange remote language, when he might speak or understand the very same thing in his own mother tongue? And what were they better, if they all so spake, unlesse it were, that thereby they were the fitter to look into all humane learning? But he or all of them that were able to understand and speak the originall language of Scripture, might thereby edifie themselves, and therein speak and understand what they could not in their mother tongue. 3. It appears by the Apostles discourse that these men used these gifts irregularly, confusedly and for their own vainglory, which he rebukes and rectifies.
6. There were also in or crept into this Church, those that were either down right Sadduces in denying the resurrection, or that though with the Pharisees they acknowledged it, yet denied it of those that had forsaken their Judaisme, and so would exclude all Christians from it: Upon this the fifteenth Chapter discourseth so fully and divinely that nothing can be more.
Those that this Church sent to visit Paul at Ephesus, brought with them a Letter from the Church, in the which they desired to be resolved about some doubts: as
1. About marriage, and a single life; what they should do in that case, since their Judaick Laws had alwaies laied marriage upon them as a binding command. This they reckon the first command of the 613. Vid. marg. ad tripl. Targ. ad Gen. 1. And this their Canons did so strictly binde on as a duty, that they say that he that lives to such an age and marries not transgresseth, a preceptive Law. Maym. in foreign per. 1. In this case the Apostle saith, Praeceptum non habeo; that he accounted it no such command, but every one was left to his liberty: according as he could contain, or not contain. And in his stating this case, how he speaks the language of his Nation, and how far he comes towards their opinions, or goes from them, the learned may observe, by comparing the beginning of this Chapter, with Maymony in his Treatise foreign especially fol. [apud me] 251. & 248. & 249.
2. About cohabitation of man and wife, when the one party was a Beleever or a Christian, and the other party an unbeliever or a Heathen. And here he concludes that the children, if either parent were a Christian, were holy, ver. 14. that is, Christians, and not to be reputed as Heathen children. It is the very phrase that his Nation used about the children of Proselytes, that were born after they were proselyted; they were said to be born foreign in holinesse, that is within the Religion, not in Heathenisme.
3. About eating things sacrificed to Idols, and communicating in such things; a dangerous stumbling block of old, and particularly forbidden by the Councill at Iorusalem: Of this he speaketh at large, and from the nature of Idol-sacrifices, and from the nature of the Sacraments he sheweth how farre they should be separate from such communion with Idolatry. He speaketh of all Israels being baptized unto Moses in the cloud and sea, and so separate from all Egyptian and other Idolatry and prophannesse; and our baptism speaks the like separation. The Jews say Moses was sanctified by the cloud, Jerus. in Joma fol. 38. col. 2. and Paul speaks here the same of all Israel, Chap. 10.2.
4. About Ministers maintenance under the Gospel, Chap. 9. which he confirmeth, and sheweth that Peter and the rest of the Apostles and their wives and families were so maintained, Chap. 9.5, &c.
He concludes the Epistle with a sad execration upon Whosoever loveth not the Lord Iesus Christ, let such a one be Anathema Maran Atha, Chap. 16.22. that is, let him be accursed or destroyed: Our Lord cometh. In which that he in the first aim and intention meaneth the unbelieving Jews, may be observed upon these four considerations. 1. Because the Jews of all men under heaven were and are the greatest haters of Christ. Pagans indeed do not love the Lord Iesus, because they know him not, but again because they know him not they hate him not. The Turks love not Christ as Christians love him, but again they hate not Christ as the Jews hate him. The word Iesus here carries the Emphasis to levell this execration at them: they pretended to love Messias or a Christ, but openly professe hatred of Iesus. 2. Because the Apostle here useth such Dialect, as that he speaketh in the very Jews language in the words Maran atha. He had spoken in Greek all along the Epistle, and Greek all along his Epistles, and that here alone he should use a Syriack phrase and not translate it, it doth evidently shew, that his speech referreth more especially to the Jewish Nation. So Ieremy in Chap. 10. v. 11. threatning and cursing the Chaldean Idolatry, doth it in the Chaldean language; one clause of which he useth not throughout his Prophesie beside. 3. The Jews of all men did chiefly or only call Jesus Anathema, as Chap. 12▪3. and as they are not ashamed openly to confesse in their Talmud; therefore against them of all men first and chiefly is this Anathema aimed. 4. This is agreeable to what the Scripture speaks copiously in other places: as Isa. 65.15. You shall leave your name for a curse to my chosen, &c. Malac. 4.6. Lest I come and smite the Land with a curse, &c. The most pious and charitable Apostle could wish himself to be Anathema for that Nation, on condition that they might beleeve and be saved, Rom. 9.3. but since they will not beleeve, and do refuse salvation, and hate the Saviour, he forgets consanguinity for the love of Christ, and dooming and devoting all whomsoever, that loved not the Lord Iesus Christ to destruction, he intends them in the first place who were his chief haters.
The words Maran-atha are held by some to be of the form of the highest excommunication; Sic signatur, say they, species extremi Anathematis, ac si diceretur, Maledictus esto ad adventum & in adventu Domini: And withall that Maran atha is the same in sense with Shammatha: but this utterly without the warrant of any Jewish antiquity [whose language it is] at all. I beleeve it is impossible to shew Maran atha for a form of Excommunication or execration in any of their Writings, nay very hard if not next impossible to shew the words Maran atha in their Writings at all in any sense.
The phrase in the Apostle refers first to Christs coming in vengeance against Ierusalem and the Jewish Nation, as the execration is first to be pitched upon them: Maran atha, Our Lord cometh. Many and dreadfull things are spoken of this his coming in the Scripture, of which we have spoken in severall places as we have come along. So that in this sentence he doth both justly doom this unbelieving and wretched Nation to their deserved curse, and doth withall in this phrase intimate that the doomed curse was near approaching, in the Lords coming in vengeance against them. Now though we construe the words in such an application to the Jews, it is not exclusively, but that their sense reacheth also to every one that loveth not the Lord Iesus of what Nation soever, and the Lord will come in time to make him an Anathema.
There is some obscurity in a passage in Chap. 5.9. both of sense and history: I wrote unto you in an Epistle not to company with fornicators: 10. Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, &c. Where first we have to inquire what it is that the Apostle doth here forbid them, and then, when it was that he wrote this Epistle that he speaketh of. There are two things that are here prohibited; one, when he wrote that which he speaketh of, namely, that they should not company with fornicators; and the other now when he writes this Epistle, viz. that they should not eat with such: the later he had permitted till now, though he prohibited the former, which let them well observe that understand by eating the receiving of the Sacrament.
Besides what communion was among the Jews in sacris, there was a twofold companying or communicating among them in civil things; the one more common, the other more neer and peculiar: Their more common was, eating together at the same common table: For even such eating they accounted of, as of a communion, under a rule: and hence no eating with Gentiles for any Jew, Act. 11.3. nor with Publicans and sinners for any that were of the stricter sort of Religions: therefore Christ is cavilled at for it so oft in the Gospel. The other was that communion or associating, which they called foreign and foreign the former of which comprehended their near joyning in partnership, deputations and the like, of the which the triple Talmudick, Tract Bava, and Maymonies of Shittuphin and Shilluchin, do treat at large. The later comprehended their combining in joynt interest and association, in the use of any common Court or Cloister where many dwelt together: of which the Treatise Erubhin is a large discourse and obscure enough. Now the Apostle in the former prohibition foreign, seems to forbid this nearer communion: that if any that is called a brother or a Christian, be a fornicator, &c. they should not associate with him in any such conjunction as partnership, deputation, imployment, cohabitation or common interest, &c. But upon the hearing of this horrid fact and example of the incestuous person, he heightens his prohibition, and now forbids, that they should not use so much as that common society with them, as to eat with them at common tables: which was to set them at the utmost distance, even at the same that the Jews did the very Heathens, for with them they might not eat.
Now how to understand foreign, is of some difficulty. Some conceive it means an Epistle, which was sent before this, and which was lost. Which is an exposition somewhat hard to digest. Certainly it is gentler and more warrantable, yea even by the rules of grammar to render foreign to such a sense as this, I wrote, or had written, or was writing in this Epistle that you should not company with fornicators, &c. but now hearing and weighing this high offence of the incestuous person, and the danger of such an example, I sharpen my style, and now forbid not only your near associating with such, but even the common fellowship of eating together at common tables, which was as much as that which is spoken, Matth. 18.17. Let him be to thee as an heathen man.