1 Corinthians 12:21

1Co 12:21-23. And the eye — In its commanding station, and possessed as it is of light and discernment; cannot say to the hand — Endowed with neither of these qualities, and the mere instrument of action; I have no need of thee — For by the hand the whole body is maintained and fed, and the eye itself preserved and defended. Nor again the head — Elevated as it is, and so admirably furnished with all the nerves and organs planted in it, cannot say to the feet — The most distant and extreme parts, mean as their form and office seems; I have no need of you — Since by them the head and all the other parts of the body are supported, and are removed from place to place. “The apostle mentions the two principal members of the body, the eye and the head, and affirms that they need the service of the inferior members, to teach such as hold the most honourable offices in the church not to despise those who are placed in the lowest stations: for as in the body, the hand needs the direction of the eye, and the eye the assistance of the hands, so in the church they who follow the active occupations of life, need the direction of the teachers. On the other hand, the teachers need to be supported by the labour of the active members.” Nay, those members which seem to be more feeble — Because unable to endure external injury, such as the brain, the lungs, the heart, and bowels; or the veins, arteries, and other minute channels in the body; are more abundantly necessary — For without them the animal functions can by no means be discharged, nor the body preserved in life and health. And likewise those members which we think to be less honourable — Or graceful, on account of their place and use; upon these we bestow — Greek, περιτιθεμεν, these we surround with more abundant honour — By carefully covering them. And our uncomely parts have — By virtue of the dress we put upon them; more abundant comeliness — Than most of the rest. It is as if he had said, The face, on which the image of God is particularly stamped, we leave uncovered; but as for those parts which decency or custom teaches us to conceal, we contrive not only to cover, but also, as far as we conveniently can, to adorn by covering. “This observation, concerning the pains which we take in adorning or concealing the weak and uncomely members of our body, the apostle makes to teach the higher members of the church to advance the honour of the whole body, by concealing the weakness and imperfections of the lowest, and by setting off their gifts and graces, whatever they may be, to the best advantage, for the reason mentioned 1Co 12:25. And when such attention is paid to the inferior, by the superior members of the church, the inferior, laying aside all envy, should willingly suffer the superior members to recommend themselves to the esteem of the whole body, by the lustre and usefulness of their more excellent gifts.”

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co 12:21. Χρείαν, need) To this refer the word necessary, 1Co 12:22.—ἡ κεφαλὴ, the head) the highest part.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_12:21. Hitherto, in 1Co_12:15-20, this figure has been used to rebuke those who were discontented with what they considered their lesser gifts; we now come to those who were proud of their higher gifts and contemptuous towards the less highly gifted.

οὐ δύναται] of the impossibility conditioned by the indispensableness of the hand for the eye.

πάλιν] as in Mat_4:7; Mat_5:33, again,since the case belongs to the same category. Comp on 2Co_10:7; Rom_15:10.

Ἡ ΚΕΦΑΛΉ] the head, consequently the part of the body which stands highest, compared with the feet, the members that stand lowest. That Paul, in his specializing representation, has in view simply the corporeal members as such, and therefore introduces the head also upon the scene with the rest, without in any way thereby touching upon the idea of Christ as the Head of the church (comp on 1Co_12:12), is plain from the whole picture, which, in its concrete details, is as far as possible from giving occasion to allegorical interpretations of the several parts of the body.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co 12:21-31 a . § 41. THE MUTUAL DEPENDENCE OF THE BODY’S MEMBERS. Multiformity, it has been shown, is of the essence of organic life. But the variously endowed members, being needful to the body, are consequently necessary to each other those that seem “weaker” sometimes the more so (1Co 12:21 f.), while the less honoured have a dignity of their own; thus all the members cherish mutual respect and fellow-feeling (1Co 12:23-26 ). This holds good of the Church, with its numerous grades of personal calling and endowment (1Co 12:27 f.). No one charism belongs to all Christians (1Co 12:29 f.). There is choice and purpose in God’s distributive appointments, which leave, moreover, room for man’s personal effort. We should desire the best of His gifts (1Co 12:31 ).

1Co 12:21 personifies again the physical members, in the fashion of 1Co 12:15 f.: there the inferior disparaged itself as though it were no part of the body at all; here the superior disparages its fellow, affecting independence. “The eye (might wish to say but) cannot say to the hand, I have no need of thee! or the head in turn to the feet, I have no need of you!” The eye and head are imagined looking superciliously on their companions; in 1Co 12:15 f. the ear and foot play the part of discontented rivals. οὐ δύναται a moral and practical impossibility ( cf. 1Co 10:21 ): at every turn the eye wants the hand, or the head calls on the foot, in order to reach its ends; the keen eye and scheming head of the paralytic what a picture of impotence! The famous Roman fable of the Belly and the Members is recalled by the Apostle’s apologue. There is no such thing in the physical, nor in the social, fabric as independence. πάλιν ( cf. 1Co 3:20 , 2Co 10:7 , Rom 15:10 ), vicissim (Hn [1911] ), rather than iterum (Vg [1912] ) or rursum (Bz [1913] ), adduces another instance of the same kind as the former.

[1911] C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklärung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or 1 Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetisches Kommentar (1896).

[1912] Latin Vulgate Translation.

[1913] Beza’s Nov. Testamentum: Interpretatio et Annotationes (Cantab., 1642).

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_12:21

And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

The third inference from the doctrine taught above, is the mutual dependence of the members of the church. As in the body the eye cannot dispense with the hand, nor the head with the feet, so in the church the most highly gifted are as much dependent on those less favored as the latter are on the former. Every thing like pride, therefore, is as much out of place in the church as discontent.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Now on the other side, he speaketh unto them which were endued with more excellent gifts, willing them not to despise the inferiors as unprofitable, and as though they served to no use: for God, saith he, hath in such sort tempered this inequality, that the more excellent and beautiful members can in no wise lack the more abject and such as we are ashamed of, and that they should have more care to see unto them, and to cover them: that by this means the necessity which is on both parts, might keep the whole body in peace and concord: that although if each part be considered apart, they are of divers degrees and conditions, yet because they are joined together, they have a community both in commodities and discommodities.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

The higher cannot dispense with the lower members.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 21. And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee] The apostle goes on, with his principal object in view, to show that the gifts and graces with which their different teachers were endowed were all necessary for their salvation, and should be collectively used; for not one of them was unnecessary, nor could they dispense with the least of them; the body of Christ needed the whole for its nourishment and support. The famous apologue of Menenius Agrippa, related by Livy, will serve to illustrate the apostle's reasoning: the Roman people, getting into a state of insurrection and rebellion against the nobility, under pretext that the great men not only had all the honours but all the emoluments of the nation, while they were obliged to bear all the burdens, and suffer all the privations; they then in riotous assemblage left their homes and went to Mount Aventine. Matters were at last brought to such an issue, that the senators and great men were obliged to fly from the city, and the public peace was on the point of being utterly ruined: it was then thought expedient to send Menenius Agrippa to them, who was high in their esteem, having vanquished the Sabines and Samnites, and had the first triumph at Rome. This great general, who was as eloquent as he was valiant, went to the Mons Sacer, to which the insurgents had retired, and thus addressed them: Tempore, quo in homine non, ut nunc emnia in unum consentiebant, sed singulis membris suum cuique consilium, suus sermo fuerat, indignatas reliquas partes, sua cura, suo labore ac ministerio ventri omnia quaeri; ventrem, in medio quietum, nihil aliud, quam datis voluptatibus frui. Conspirasse inde, ne manus ad os cibum ferrent, nec os acciperet datum, nec dentes conficerent. Hac ira, dum ventrem fame domare vellent, ipsa una membra totumque corpus ad extremam tabem venisse. lnde apparuisse, ventris quoque haud segne ministerium esse: nec magis ali, quam alere eum, reddentem in omnes corporis partes hunc, quo vivimus vigemusque, divisum pariter in venas maturum, confecto cibo, sanquinem. T. Livii, Histor. lib. ii. cap. 32. "In that time in which the different parts of the human body were not in a state of unity as they now are, but each member had its separate office and distinct language, they all became discontented, because whatever was procured by their care, labour, and industry, was spent on the belly; while this, lying at ease in the midst of the body, did nothing but enjoy whatever was provided for it. They therefore conspired among themselves, and agreed that the hands should not convey food to the mouth, that the mouth should not receive what was offered to it, and that the teeth should not masticate whatever was brought to the mouth. Acting on this principle of revenge, and hoping to reduce the belly by famine, all the members, and the whole body itself, were at length brought into the last stage of a consumption. It then plainly appeared that the belly itself did no small service; that it contributed not less to their nourishment than they did to its support, distributing to every part that from which they derived life and vigour; for by properly concocting the food, the pure blood derived from it was conveyed by the arteries to every member."

This sensible comparison produced the desired effect; the people were persuaded that the senators were as necessary to their existence as they were to that of the senators, and that it required the strictest union and mutual support of high and low to preserve the body politic. This transaction took place about 500 years before the Christian era, and was handed down by unbroken tradition to the time of Titus Livius, from whom I have taken it, who died in the year of our Lord 17, about forty years before St. Paul wrote this epistle. As his works were well known and universally read among the Romans in the time of the apostle, it is very probable that St. Paul had this famous apologue in view when he wrote from the 14th verse to the end of the chapter. 1Cor 12:1; 1Cor 12:14-31

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

21. And the eye cannot say to the hand Hitherto he has been showing, what is the office of the less honorable members — to discharge their duty to the body, and not envy the more distinguished members. Now, on the other hand, he enjoins it upon the more honorable members, not to despise the inferior members, which they cannot dispense with. The eye excels the hand, and yet cannot despise it, or insult over it, as though it were useless; and he draws an argument from utility, to show that it ought to be thus — “Those members, that are less esteemed, are the more necessary: hence, with a view to the safety of the body, they must not be despised.” He makes use of the term weaker here, to mean despised, as in another passage, when he says that he glories in his infirmities, (2 Corinthians 12:9,) he expresses, under this term, those things which rendered him contemptible and abject.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

And the eye cannot say unto the hand,.... Every member of the natural body is useful and necessary. The eye, the seat of the sense of seeing, cannot say to the communicating and working hand,

I have no need of thee: I can do without thee: so the seers and overseers of the church, the ministers of the Gospel, cannot say to the liberal and munificent hands, we have no need of you; for as the one stand in need of the light, instruction, comfort, advice, and direction of the other, so the other stand in need of communication from them; and as God has made it a duty, that he that is taught in the word should communicate to him that teacheth in all good things; and as it is his ordinance that they which preach the Gospel should live of it; so he has generally ordered it in his providence, that they that teach should need such assistance:

nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. The head, which is the seat of the senses, and is superior to, and has the command and government of all the members of the body, cannot say to the lowest and most distant parts of it, the feet, you are needless and useless; so those that are set in the first place in the church, are over others in the Lord, and have the rule over them, cannot say to those that are under them, and submit unto them, even the lowest and meanest of them, that they are of no use and service to them; they can no more be without them, than the head can be without the feet, or than princes can do without subjects, or magistrates without citizens, or generals without soldiers.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.

Ver. 21. The eye cannot say, &c.] Superiors may not slight their inferiors, since they cannot be without them, as one time or other they will be forced to acknowledge. It was a saying of General Vere to the king of Denmark, that kings cared not for soldiers until such time as their crowns hung on the one side of their heads.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And the eye cannot say unto the hand ... - The hand in its place is as needful as the eye; and the feet as the head. Nay, the eye and the head could not perform their appropriate functions, or would be in a great measure useless but for the aid of the hands and feet. Each is useful in its proper place. So in the church. Those that are most talented and most richly endowed with gifts, cannot say to those less so, that there is no need of their aid. All are useful in their place. Nay, those who are most richly endowed could very imperfectly perform their duties without the aid and cooperation of those of more humble attainments.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

He names two of the most noble and useful members of the body, the head and the eye, which yet cannot tell the hands or the feet they have no need of them: the wise God having created nothing in vain, but made every member in the body of a man for use, as to the whole, so to the several parts of the body; the hand is useful to the eye, and the feet are of use to the head. The application of this similitude, which the apostle so much enlargeth upon, we shall have, 1Co 12:27, &c.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

21. The overseer, the eye, cannot dispense with the worker, the hand. The official, the head, cannot spare the membership, the feet.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

I have no need of thee. A rebuke to the pride of those who thought their own gifts to be exclusively valuable.

Respect is better than contempt.

In previous verses the apostle has expostulated with those in lowly stations and with inferior gifts who give way to the temptation to repine because of what is their own and to envy the higher position and the larger gifts of others. In this verse he exemplifies his justice and impartiality, rebuking those who despise such as are beneath them in mental or spiritual endowments.

I PRIDE FOLLOWS UPON FORGETFULNESS OF THE DIVINE SOURCE OF ALL GIFTS. The man who looks down upon his fellow Christian virtually boasts of whatever he himself has which he deems a ground of superiority. Now, this is in contradiction to the precepts of the Bible and the spirit of Christ. "What hast thou that thou didst not receive? Who hath made thee to differ?

II CONTEMPT IMPLIES FORGETFULNESS OF THE RULE OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE. Can we say to a brother, "I have no need of thee"? whilst we remember that the Head of the Church has stationed him where he is, and has given him what he possesses? To question his place in the Church, his function in the body, his service to the Head, is to dispute the wisdom and the authority of Christ himself.

III CONTEMPT IS SELF DESTRUCTIVE. It rebounds upon the head of him who casts it at his neighbour. For the fact is that we are members one of another in such a sense that each one"s efficiency and usefulness is to a large extent dependent upon those of his brethren. In the figure used by the apostle, the eye and the head in which it is so pre-eminently and regally stationed, are taken as representing the great and notable among the members of a Christian society. And it is laid down as evident that they cannot say to hand, to foot, to the trunk and all the vital organs, "I have no need of you." For the fact is, they have such need. The well known fable of Agrippa may be quoted, as in Shakespeare"s "Coriolanus," in illustration and proof of the mutual dependence of all parts of the organism. So is it in the Church of God. The great controversialist, the great episcopal administrator, the great Biblical scholar, the great church builder, are all doubtless and undeniably of great importance, and fill a large place in men"s eyes. But the obscure pastor, the lowly Scripture reader, the unnoticed Bible woman, the patient and unrewarded teacher of the young, these and many others like them are the rank and file of the army, andcannot be dispensed with. To look down upon them with disdain would be a proof of folly as well as of sinful self conceit. Happily, the truly great are ever foremost to recognize the value of the labours of the humble, ever foremost to do them honour. They know full well that their own work would fall to pieces were it not for the unnoticed work of others who may be less known to fame.

IV MUTUAL RESPECT IS PROMOTIVE OF SPIRITUAL UNITY. Let there be murmuring among the lowly and disdain among the great, and there follows at once a "schism." But when each renders due honour to his brother, the society is compacted, and is made strong for its united work and witness in the world. T.

Mutual service.

These words indicate, not only the principles that ought to govern the Church of Christ, but also the Divine order and law of all human society. The New Testament Church, like the ancient Jewish commonwealth, bears a representative character. We have to regard it, not only as a spiritual fellowship distinct from the world, united by a different bond, ruled by different laws, inspired by a different spirit, living a different life, advancing to a different destiny, but also as a fellowship that is called to illustrate before the world the Divine idea of social human life. Taking this broader view of the passage, observe

I THE WAY IN WHICH CHRISTIANITY RECOGNIZES SOCIAL DISTINCTIONS. These are suggested by the "eye," the "hand," the "head," and the "feet." The distinctions that exist among men are of various kinds natural and acquired, essential and conventional. There are distinctions intellectual, moral, educational, national, official, circumstantial. All these are recognized in some way or other by the religion of Christ. But they do not receive from it precisely the same recognition. They are not recognized by it to the same extent. There are certain social distinctions that are far too deeply rooted in the instinctive tendencies of our nature, or in the moral necessity of things, ever to be obliterated. If they could be levelled in one age they would inevitably rise again in the next. If levelled in a violent and repressive way, they only spring up afterwards in some exaggerated and extravagant form. The French Revolution began with glorious dreams of "liberty, fraternity, and equality;" it ended in a "Reign of Terror" in which every man"s hand was against his brother, in a military despotism that crushed the hopes and energies of the people in the dust, in social separations broader and deeper than had been known before. The religion of Christ is in no way antagonistic to those radical and natural tendencies it does but mould and regulate them. It seeks to control, but not to crush them, wisely to direct the current, but not to stay its course. Revolutionary as it is in its purpose and workings, it is truly conservative, gradually transforming the whole life of man, but demanding no violent changes, developing the form of the nobler future out of the crude, imperfect, and misshapen past. Hence what seems to some the strange silence of apostolic teaching in reference to many of the dark facts and phases of the social life of the world as then existing slavery, polygamy, military tyranny, oppressive laws, etc. The chief lesson for us here, however, is this that in the body politic, the living frame of society, each man according to his distinction has his own special function and special work to do. There is the eye the discerning, perceptive, observant power; the head the regulative, guiding, governmental power; the hand the operative faculty, the power that does the finer and more skilful work of the world; and the feet the part of the frame that bears the heavier burdens, does the drudgery, endures in the way of physical toil the more painful pressure of life. Each member has its own particular work to do, and which another cannot do. The eye cannot handle, the hand cannot see, the head cannot bear the heavy burdens, the feet cannot direct. There are men of fine speculative, philosophic thought, but who have little practical capacity; a nice discernment of the truth of things, but no power to embody even their own ideas in real and substantial forms. Again, there are men of great administrative ability, quick for all the practical business of life, "born to rule" or to manage affairs; place them where you will they will soon assert their power, and others will recognize it and follow their leading. While there are also men to whom physical toil is a natural instinctive delight, and whom the educational influences of life never have fitted or, perhaps, could fit for any other function. Distinctions that grow thus in a natural way out of radical qualities in men Christianity recognizes. Also those that belong to the parental and family relations, or that may be necessary to assert the majesty of law. (Rom_13:1-6) But as to any further distinctions, any that rest upon a purely fictitious and conventional basis, having no foundation in nature, which merely feed the lust of power and the pride of life, it would seem to acknowledge none.

II THE LAW OF MUTUAL DEPENDENCE THAT GOVERNS ALL PARTS OF THE SOCIAL FRAME. The conditions of our life in this world involve us all, in a thousand subtle ways, in the obligation to serve one another, and subject us all, whether we will or not, to the law of self sacrifice. All nature, in its purely physical aspects, is framed on this principle.

Nothing in the world is single,

All things, by a law Divine,

In another"s being mingle.

Every form of physical existence draws its life from those beneath it, and in its turn has to surrender its life to them. The lower forms exist for the higher, the highest can never assert its freedom from the law of dependence on the lowest. So in the complex system of human life, no grade in the social scale, no order of faculty, no kind of "interest," can claim exemption from the common bond. Take e.g. the relation that exists between the men of thought and the men of action, the theoretical and the practical. They are apt to think and to speak slightingly of each other; the one intolerant of being brought continually to a merely utilitarian test, the other always ready with the charge of speculative dreaming. This is a mistake. God has set the one over against the other, "that the one without the other should not be made perfect." Thought without action is worthless. Yet it is thought that rules the world, and if there were no "eye" to guide it the labour of the "hand" would soon cease. So also of social conditions. The tendency sometimes seen in those upon whom the burdens of toil and privation press most heavily, to look up enviously, suspiciously, and even defiantly towards those who occupy a higher level, may be very senseless; but, on the other hand, what more false and irrational than the tone of lofty superiority that social distinction sometimes assumes? Can the head, then, say to the feet, "I have no need of you"? What would become of the loftiest dignities of the world if there were none to bear the heavier burdens and do the rougher work of life? From what do the fairest forms of our civilization spring, our comforts and indulgences, and all the thousand pleasant associations of our life? of what are they the fruits, but of patient, life consuming labour in field and factory and mine? All the bright and beautiful things of the world, all the pride and glory of man"s existence in it, have their roots more or less directly in the base earth. The eye and the head, with all their fine sensibility and lofty faculty, can do nothing without the hands and the feet. Christianity gives the utmost sanctity and force to this lesson. It is in the light of the incarnation, the sympathetic humanity, the lowly life, the beneficent ministry, the sacrificial death, of the Lord Jesus that we see what a wondrous bond of brotherhood it is that unites the whole human family together, and that we learn to understand the great law that God has formed us all to "live not unto ourselves." The gospel makes us more keenly sensible of our obligations than of our rights, of what we owe to others than of what they owe to us. It inspires us with the spirit of him who was "among us as one that serveth" and who "gave his life a ransom for many.

III THE GROUND ON WHICH WE OUGHT TO PAY SPECIAL HONOUR TO OUR FELLOW MEN. The Law of Christ teaches us to reverence our common humanity in all its conditions. "Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king". (1Pe_2:17) These utterances would seem to embrace all the points of Christian duty in this respect. But the whole drift of the apostle"s teaching, in this as in so many other places, is to the effect that special honour is due to the faithful discharge of personal responsibility. Whatever station men occupy, whatever function they perform, it is the profitable use of faculty for the common good that confers upon them the noblest distinction.

Honour and shame from no condition rise; Act well your part; there all the honour lies. W.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Nor the head - The highest part of all. To the foot - The very lowest.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

And the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of thee: or again the head to the feet, I have no need of you . [The interdependence of the members is here shown. If, as we have seen above, the humbly envious one felt as if he were not included in the church, the proudly superior member felt as if the humbler one should be excluded. Here we find the eye and hand associated contrary to the usage in verses 15 and 16. Those who are puffed up with some great gift do not see the need of any other gifts save their own. But they tolerate those who have their gift in less degree, for such form a background to show off their excellencies. We have seen vain singers who esteemed the preaching as of very little importance, and vice versa. Paul continues to discuss this interdependence.]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

21–26. And the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of thee. Every member of the body has its place and is needed by every other member.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

I have no need of you

"I do not need you"

less honorable

"less important"

our unpresentable members

This probably refers to the private parts of the body, which people keep covered. (See: Euphemism)

translationWords

member

body

honor

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

21-26.] And the spiritual gifts are also necessary to one another. This is spoken in reproof of the highly endowed, who imagined they could do without those less gifted than themselves, as the preceding to those of small endowment, who were discontented with their gifts.

22,

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21. Hitherto he has been regarding the inferior organs, who grumbled because they were not superior. Now he takes the superior, who looked down on the inferior. All, of course, with reference to evils at Corinth. ‘But the eye cannot say to the hand’—cannot, without stultifying itself: it is manifestly untrue. What would become of the desire of the eyes if there were no hand to grasp it? There is no such thing as independence either in an organism or in society. All parts are not equal, and no one part can isolate itself. From the first there is dependence and subordination.

The article before ὀφθαλμός is certainly genuine (א A B C D E F G L P), and the δε before ὁ όφθαλμός is probably genuine (א B D E K L, Latt.). Arm. omits both.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vv. 21, 22. “But the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. 22. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary.”

The δέ, but, is sufficiently supported by the documents. As in 1Co 12:18 Paul had contrasted God’s doing with the saying of the foot and the ear, he here contrasts with God’s doing the saying of the eye or the head. The eye, privileged as it is by its eminent function and noble position in the body, cannot dispense with the inferior members, the hand, for example, without which it could not appropriate the objects which seem to it desirable. The same is the case with the head in relation to the feet. The head is named here, not as representing the Christ, but as uniting all the organs whose functions are most essential to life. What would the ear, the tongue, the nose, the palate do, if the feet were not at their service?

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.