BibleTools.info

3. Answer. Gr. apologia, “apology,” “defense.” This is a legal term that was applied to a speech in defense of one who was on trial (see Acts 25:16; Phil. 1:7, 17; 2 Tim. 4:16). Here the word means Paul’s answer to those who sat in judgment upon his claim that he was an apostle. Fully realizing that it was by divine power that he had laid the foundations of the Corinthian church, Paul pointed to the believers themselves as the seal, or solemn confirmation, of his apostleship, his defense against all opponents.

Examine. Gr. anakrin?, like apologia, a legal term applied to judges in courts, those who sit in judgment, and investigate and decide questions brought before them (see Luke 23:14; Acts 4:9; 24:8).

This. Commentators disagree as to whether the pronoun refers to what precedes (vs. 1, 2) or to what follows. Perhaps the lengthier discussion of the succeeding verses is more suitably introduced by this statement than the foregoing two verses are summarized by it. In that event, that which follows constitutes the defense that Paul presents to those who presumed to question his authority as an apostle. In vs. 4-6 he sets out the main objections that had been raised, and in the following verses shows that they are of no force.

3. Answer. Gr. apologia, “apology,” “defense.” This is a legal term that was applied to a speech in defense of one who was on trial (see Acts 25:16; Phil. 1:7, 17; 2 Tim. 4:16). Here the word means Paul’s answer to those who sat in judgment upon his claim that he was an apostle. Fully realizing that it was by divine power that he had laid the foundations of the Corinthian church, Paul pointed to the believers themselves as the seal, or solemn confirmation, of his apostleship, his defense against all opponents.

Hungry. The poor believer, trusting in the charity of his more fortunate brethren, came to the feast believing that his need would be provided, but he was disappointed by the selfishness and unchristian pride of the rich.

Examine. Gr. anakrin?, like apologia, a legal term applied to judges in courts, those who sit in judgment, and investigate and decide questions brought before them (see Luke 23:14; Acts 4:9; 24:8).

Drunken. Gr. methu?, “to be intoxicated.” This word refers definitely to inordinate use of intoxicants to the point of loss of self-control. Paul intimates that the Corinthians ate and drank to excess at these feasts, and as a result their professed celebration of the Lord’s Supper became merely a farcical rite.

It may be considered surprising that Christians who lived in apostolic days, and who had been taught by Paul himself, should so pervert the nature and purpose of the Lord’s Supper as to turn it into a copy of their former heathen entertainments. It must be remembered that the Corinthians had only recently abandoned heathenism. They had been accustomed to engaging in excessive feasting in honor of false gods, and it would be comparatively easy for them to imagine that the Lord’s Supper could be celebrated in a similar manner. The divisions and party strife that marred their spiritual experience would cloud their vision and make it easier for them to corrupt the observance of the ordinance. This experience of the Corinthian believers shows that new Christians need careful and prolonged instruction and wise, sympathetic leadership and supervision until they are firmly rooted in the fundamental truths of the gospel. Compromise with non-Christian beliefs and practices always results in departure from the purity and simplicity of the gospel (see Deut. 7:1-4; 18:9-14; 2 Cor. 6:14-17).

3. Answer. Gr. apologia, “apology,” “defense.” This is a legal term that was applied to a speech in defense of one who was on trial (see Acts 25:16; Phil. 1:7, 17; 2 Tim. 4:16). Here the word means Paul’s answer to those who sat in judgment upon his claim that he was an apostle. Fully realizing that it was by divine power that he had laid the foundations of the Corinthian church, Paul pointed to the believers themselves as the seal, or solemn confirmation, of his apostleship, his defense against all opponents.

Examine. Gr. anakrinō, like apologia, a legal term applied to judges in courts, those who sit in judgment, and investigate and decide questions brought before them (see Luke 23:14; Acts 4:9; 24:8).

This. Commentators disagree as to whether the pronoun refers to what precedes (vs. 1, 2) or to what follows. Perhaps the lengthier discussion of the succeeding verses is more suitably introduced by this statement than the foregoing two verses are summarized by it. In that event, that which follows constitutes the defense that Paul presents to those who presumed to question his authority as an apostle. In vs. 4-6 he sets out the main objections that had been raised, and in the following verses shows that they are of no force.

3. Answer. Gr. apologia, “apology,” “defense.” This is a legal term that was applied to a speech in defense of one who was on trial (see Acts 25:16; Phil. 1:7, 17; 2 Tim. 4:16). Here the word means Paul’s answer to those who sat in judgment upon his claim that he was an apostle. Fully realizing that it was by divine power that he had laid the foundations of the Corinthian church, Paul pointed to the believers themselves as the seal, or solemn confirmation, of his apostleship, his defense against all opponents.

Hungry. The poor believer, trusting in the charity of his more fortunate brethren, came to the feast believing that his need would be provided, but he was disappointed by the selfishness and unchristian pride of the rich.

Examine. Gr. anakrinō, like apologia, a legal term applied to judges in courts, those who sit in judgment, and investigate and decide questions brought before them (see Luke 23:14; Acts 4:9; 24:8).

Drunken. Gr. methuō, “to be intoxicated.” This word refers definitely to inordinate use of intoxicants to the point of loss of self-control. Paul intimates that the Corinthians ate and drank to excess at these feasts, and as a result their professed celebration of the Lord’s Supper became merely a farcical rite.

It may be considered surprising that Christians who lived in apostolic days, and who had been taught by Paul himself, should so pervert the nature and purpose of the Lord’s Supper as to turn it into a copy of their former heathen entertainments. It must be remembered that the Corinthians had only recently abandoned heathenism. They had been accustomed to engaging in excessive feasting in honor of false gods, and it would be comparatively easy for them to imagine that the Lord’s Supper could be celebrated in a similar manner. The divisions and party strife that marred their spiritual experience would cloud their vision and make it easier for them to corrupt the observance of the ordinance. This experience of the Corinthian believers shows that new Christians need careful and prolonged instruction and wise, sympathetic leadership and supervision until they are firmly rooted in the fundamental truths of the gospel. Compromise with non-Christian beliefs and practices always results in departure from the purity and simplicity of the gospel (see Deut. 7:1-4; 18:9-14; 2 Cor. 6:14-17).