1 Corinthians 12:3

1Co 12:3. Wherefore — Since it was so with you once, and it is otherwise now, this is a full demonstration of the truth of the Christian religion, through your faith in, and reception of, which, you received these gifts, which none of the heathen idols, blind, and dumb, and lifeless as they were, could possibly confer upon you. I give you to understand, that no man, speaking by the Spirit of God — Who is endued with these spiritual gifts, or is at all inspired by the Holy Spirit; calleth Jesus accursed — Pronounces him to be an impostor, and therefore justly punished with death. It seems that some, who pretended to be inspired, did this; probably the Jewish exorcists, together with the heathen priests and priestesses, who in their enthusiastic fits reviled Jesus. Now the apostle intended here to teach the Corinthians, that if any such persons were really inspired, that is, if they spake by any supernatural impulse, it certainly proceeded from evil spirits, and not from the Spirit of God, who never would move any one to speak in that manner of Jesus. By this the apostle cuts off all who spoke blasphemously and irreverently of Christ, whether Jews or heathen, from all pretences to the possession of spiritual gifts, or of any supernatural influence from the true God. These gifts and inspirations could only be found among true Christians. On the other hand, no man can say that Jesus is the Lord — Can receive him as such; can think or speak reverently of him; can make profession of his name, when that profession would expose him to imprisonment and martyrdom; can worship him aright, and heartily acknowledge his divinity and lordship, (against which there was then the greatest opposition made,) so as to subject himself sincerely and entirely to his government: but by the Holy Ghost — By his directing, renewing, and purifying influences. The sum is, None have the Holy Spirit but true Christians; true believers in, and disciples of, the Lord Jesus; and all such have the Spirit, at least in his enlightening and sanctifying graces.

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

12:3 Paul gives two criteria for discerning the presence of the Spirit in worship. (1) Those who curse Jesus thereby express their rejection of Jesus and his message and thus cannot be speaking by the Spirit of God. (2) The presence of the Holy Spirit in believers’ lives is shown by their sincere confession that Jesus is Lord. This is perhaps the earliest Christian creed (cp. Rom 10:9, 13; 2 Cor 4:5; Phil 2:11; 1 Jn 4:2-3).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

1Co 12:3. Διὸ, wherefore) He infers this thesis, that spiritual things are with all Christians, and with [in the possession of] them alone, i.e. with those who glorify Jesus; and that by means of those spiritual things faith in Jesus is proved; for idols bestow nothing spiritual: when the superstition of the Gentiles was overthrown, there was not the same need of miraculous gifts. This is the alternative, he who glorifies Jesus, has the Spirit of God; he who does not glorify Him, has not the Spirit of God, 1Jn 4:1-2. Paul furnishes a test of truth against the Gentiles; John, against the false prophets.—γνωρίζω ὑμῖν, I make known to you) Divine operations of that sort had been formerly unknown to the Corinthians. Before receiving these letters of Paul, their knowledge had been less distinct, as they had been rescued not long before from heathenism.—ἐν πνεύματι Θεοῦ, by the Spirit of God) Immediately after he says, by the Holy Ghost. Godhead and sanctity1[107] are synonymous especially when speaking of the Holy Trinity.—λαλῶν, speaking) This expression is of very wide application; for even those, who perform cures and possess miraculous powers, are accustomed to use words. The antithesis is to the dumb idols.—λέγει ἀνάθεμα, calls Him accursed) as the Gentiles did, but the Jews more so. There is a ταπείνωσις, or saying less than is intended. He does not call Him accursed, i.e. he in the highest degree pronounces Him blessed. Accursed and Lord are opposed. [It is a proof of long-suffering patience, which surpasses all comprehension, that Jesus Christ, the Lord, at the right hand of the Father does not refuse to tolerate, for so long a period of time, such a mass of blasphemy from unbelievers, and especially from the Jews, in their wretched state of blindness. That consideration ought to suppress in the Christian any indignation felt by him on account of any reproach whatever, however little deserved.—V. g.]—εἰπεῖν, to say) πνευματικῶς, in a spiritual manner.

[107] 1 Sanctitas, Holy Majesty. See note, Rom 1:4.—ED.

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

1Co_12:3. Διό] therefore, because the experiences of spiritually gifted men could not be known to you in your heathen state,[1924] and you have consequently all the more need of sound instruction on the subject, therefore I give you to know: the fundamental characteristic of speaking by the Spirit is, that Jesus is not execrated, but confessed as Lord. Paul expresses this in the two parallel thoughts: that the former, the execration, comes from the lips of no inspired person; and that the latter, the confession of the Lord, can only be uttered by the power of the Holy Spirit. Both the negative and the positive marks are thereby given; and it is arbitrary to lay the whole stress, as Billroth and Rückert do, upon the second half, and to regard the first as almost superfluous and a mere foil to the second. Paul must, moreover, have had his own special reasons for placing such a general guiding rule at the head of his whole discussion in answer to the question, Who in general is to be held an inspired speaker? Among all the different forms and even perversions of the gift of speaking in the Spirit at Corinth, men may have been divided upon the question, Who was properly to be regarded as speaking by the Spirit, and who not? and against all arbitrary, envious, exclusive judgments on this point the apostle strikes all the more powerfully, the more he brings out here the width of the specific field of speaking in the Spirit, and the more simply and definitely he lays down at the same time its characteristics. To find any special reference here to the speaking with tonguesand in particular to go so far in that direction as to assume (Hofmann, comp his Schriftbew. I. p. 309) that the first clause guards against anxiety in presence of the γλώσσαις λαλεῖν, and the second against undervaluing the προφητεύεινcomes just to this, that Paul has expressed himself in a highly unintelligible way, and arbitrarily anticipates the elucidations in detail which follow.

ἐν πνεύματι Θεοῦ] so that the Holy Spirit is the element which pervades his inner life, and in which the λαλεῖν takes place. Comp on Rom_8:15; Mat_22:43.

λαλῶν] uttering himself, speaking; λέγει, on the other hand, has reference to the object of the utterance. Comp on Rom_3:19; Joh_8:43; Schulz, Geistesgaben, p. 94 ff.

ἀνάθεμα Ἰησοῦς] sc[1928] ἐστί, accursed (see on Rom_9:3; Gal_1:8), fallen into eternal perdition is Jesus! This is the anti-Christian (especially the Jewish) confession; the Christian is: Κύριος Ἰησοῦς, Jesus is Lord! Comp Php_2:11. Why did Paul not say Χριστός? Because, from its original appellative meaning, it would not have suited the first clause (ἀνάθ.); in the second, again, its appellative meaning is contained in Κύριος; and in both it was essential to name the historical Person who was the Messiah of the Christians faith as exalted to be the σύνθρονος of God. It is self-evident, we may add, that Paul regarded the Κύριος Ἰησοῦς as the constant watchword of the believing heart, and the keynote of inspired speech. Paulus loquitur de confessione perseveranti et in tota doctrina, Melanchthon.

Regarding the confession itself, comp 1Jn_4:1 f., where the proposition is of substantially the same import, only still more directly aimed against false teachers.

[1924] Similarly de Wette; comp. Bengel, and, yet earlier, Luthers gloss. Osiander drags in a contrast between the one Lord of the Christians and the many κυρίους of heathenism. Moreover, widely differing statements as to the connection are to be found among interpreters. Chrysostom, Oecumenius, and Theophylact trace it back in a perfectly arbitrary way to the contrast between the unconscious mania of heathen inspiration and the conscious inspiration of Christians. Comp. Neander: because it is now otherwise with you, and you have become free organs of the Holy Spirit. Kling (in the Stud. u. Krit. 1838, p. 486) makes it: that you may not suffer yourselves to be again carried away to blind worship of an unintelligible phenomenon (?). Theodoret holds that what is referred to is the contrast between the διαφωνία of heathenism and the σνμφωνία in Christianity. In like manner Räbiger: because your heathen cultus did not rest upon a common Divine Spirit ruling in you all, I make it known to you that there is such a principle in Christianity in the πνεῦμα Θεοῦ. But in this way the essential point on which the question hinges is only gained by abstraction out of what Paul actually says, and that in the interest of the assumption that he designs to secure for the glossolalia the respect due to it as against the opposition of the Pauline party. Paul is here making known to his readers the criterion of Christian inspiration as regards its confession, and that for this reason (διό), because they, as formerly serving dumb idols, had all the more need of this γνωρίζειν. The words before us yield no more than this. Ewald also imports too much into them: You will not surely wish back your former heathen days; … it is in the light of that old state of things that one first really comes rightly to understand and feel the value of Christianity, and so forth. Hofmann shapes the connection in accordance with his construction of the text in ver. 2 : because Paul does not wish to leave his readers in the dark περὶ π. πνευματικῶν; and because, on the other hand, he knows what their old life had been as respects divine service, therefore he gives them the following instructions. This is logically incorrect. For the second element in this case would not be one brought forward in addition to the first (τέ), but one already lying at the root of it; and Paul must therefore have written, not οἶδά τε (as Hofmann reads), but οἶδα γαρ.

[1928] c. scilicet.

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 12:3 . Their old experience of the spells of heathenism had not prepared the Cor [1834] to understand the workings of God’s Spirit and the notes of His presence. On this subject they had asked (1), and P. now gives instruction: “Wherefore I inform you”. They knew how men could be “carried away” by supernatural influences; they wanted a criterion for distinguishing those truly Divine. The test P. supplies is that of loyalty to Jesus Christ . “No one speaking in the Spirit of God says ΑΝΑΘΕΜΑ ΙΗΣΟΥΣ , and no one can say ΚΥΡΙΟΣ ΙΗΣΟΥΣ except in the Holy Spirit.” Jesus is anathema, Jesus is Lord , are the battlecries of the spirits of error and of truth contending at Cor [1835] The second watchword is obvious, its inclusiveness is the point of interest; it certificates all true Christians, with whatever διαιρέσεις χαρισμάτων (1Co 12:4 ff.), as possessors of the Holy Spirit, since He inspires the confession of their Master’s name which makes them such (see 1Co 1:2 , Rom 10:9 , Phi 2:11 , etc.). Not a mystical “tongue,” but the clear intelligent confession “Jesus is Lord” marks out the genuine πνευματικός ; cf. the parl [1836] cry Ἀββᾶ ὁ πατήρ , of Gal 4:6 . “He shall glorify Me ,” said Jesus (Joh 16:14 ) of the coming Spirit: this is the infallible proof of His indwelling. But who were those who might say at Cor [1837] , “Jesus is anathema ”? Faciebant gentes , says Bg [1838] , sed magis Judœi . Ἀνάθεμα (see parls.) is Hebraistic in Biblical use, denoting that which is cherem, vowed to God for destruction as under His curse , like Achan in Joshua’s camp. So the High Priest and the Jewish people treated Jesus (Joh 11:49 f., Gal 3:13 ), using perhaps these very words of execration ( cf. Heb 6:6 ), which Saul of Tarsus himself had doubtless uttered in blaspheming the Nazarene (1Ti 1:13 ); this cry, so apt to Jewish lips, resounded in the Synagogue in response to apostolic preaching. Christian assemblies, in the midst of their praises of the Lord Jesus, would sometimes be startled by a fierce Jew screaming out like a man possessed, “Jesus is anathema!” for unbelievers on some occasions had access to Christian meetings (1Co 14:24 ). Such frenzied shouts, heard in moments of devotion, affected susceptible natures as with the presence of an unearthly power; hence the contrast which Paul draws. This watchword of hostile Jews would be taken up by the Gentile mobs which they roused against the Nazarenes; see Act 13:45 ; Act 18:6 , where βλασφημοῦντες may well include λέγοντες Ἀνάθεμα Ἰησοῦς . Gd [1839] , ad loc [1840] , and W. F. Slater ( Faith and Life of the Early Church , pp. 348 f.) suppose both cries to originate in the Church; they ascribe the anathema to heretics resembling Cerinthus and the Ophites, who separated Jesus from Christ ( cf. 1Jn 2:18 ff; 1Jn 4:1-6 ); but this identification is foreign to the situation and context, and is surely an anachronism. The distinction between λαλέω and λέγω is well exemplified here: λαλεῖν ἐν is “to speak in the element and sphere of, under the influence of” the Holy Spirit.

[1834] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.

[1835] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.

[1836] parallel.

[1837] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.

[1838] Bengel’s Gnomon Novi Testamenti.

[1839] F. Godet’s Commentaire sur la prem. Ép. aux Corinthiens (Eng. Trans.).

[1840] ad locum , on this passage.

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

3. διὸ γνωρίζω ὑμῖν. ‘On which account I make known to you’ (15:1; Gal 1:2). Excepting the Pastoral Epistles, διό is frequent in the Pauline Epp. Seeing that in their heathen state they could know nothing about spiritual gifts, nor how to discern whether a person was speaking by the Spirit or not, he must tell them by what kind of spiritual power God makes revelations to man.† No utterance inspired by Him can be against Christ. Every word for Christ is inspired by Him.

ἐν Πνεύματι θεοῦ. The ἐν may express either sphere or instrumentality: comp. Rom 9:1, Rom 9:14:17, Rom 9:15:16; Luk 3:16. Although it is perhaps more common to have the article where direct agency is meant (6:2), yet active influence rather than surrounding element seems to be implied here. See J. A. Robinson on Eph 5:18. The difference between λαλεῖν and λέγειν may be noted, the one of uttering sounds, the other of articulately saying something: comp. ch. 14. passim; Act 2:4, Act 2:6, Act 2:7, Act 2:11. The blasphemous Ἀνάθεμα Ἰησοῦς would be more likely to be uttered by a Jew than a Gentile; faciebant gentes, sed magis Judaei (Beng.). It is possible that it was uttered against Jesus by His bitter enemies even during His life on earth. It is not improbable that Saul himself used it in his persecuting days, and strove to make others do so (Act 26:11). When the Gospel was preached in the synagogues the fanatical Jews would be likely to use these very words when Jesus was proclaimed as the Messiah (Act 13:45, Act 18:6). Unbelievers, whether Jews or Gentiles, were admitted to Christian gatherings (14:24), and therefore one of these might suddenly exclaim in the middle of public worship, Ἀνάθεμα Ἰησοῦς. To the inexperienced Corinthians a mad shout of this kind, reminding them of the shrieks of frenzied worshippers of Dionysus and the Corybantes, might seem to be inspired: see Findlay ad loc. St Paul assures them that this anti-Christian utterance is absolutely decisive: it cannot come from the Spirit. * for ἀνάθεμα comp. 16:22; Gal 1:8, Gal 1:9; Trench, Syn. § v.; Cremer, p. 547; Suicer 268. It is one of the 103 words which in N.T. are found only in Paul and Luke (Hawkins, Hor. Syn. p. 190). It is less likely that St Paul is thinking of cases of apostasy. Fifty years later, those who denied that they were Christians were required to blaspheme Christ: this was the crucial test. Qui negabant esse se Christianos aut fuisse, cum praeeunte me deos appellarent et imagini tuae ture ac vino supplicarent, praeterea male dicerent Christo, quorum nihil posse cogs dicuntur qui sent re vera Christiani, dimittendos esse putavi. (Pliny to Trajan, Ep. 10:96).

Κύριος Ἰησοῦς. This comprehensive utterance is as wide as Christendom: every loyal Christian is inspired. Those who have received special gifts, such as those which are mentioned below (4-11), must not regard those who have not received them as devoid of the Spirit. This is one of the ways in which the Spirit glorifies Jesus (Joh 16:14), by enabling many to confess Him as Lord. Comp. the similar double test, negative and positive, given in 1Jn 4:2-4; but while St John has in view those who denied the humanity of Christ, St Paul has in view those who denied His Divinity. In Gal 4:6 we have the parallel cry, ‘Abba, Father,’ as a mark of Christian adoption; and in Act 8:16, Act 19:5 we have the formula, baptized ‘into the name of the Lord Jesus.’*

3. λόγος γνώσεως 2. προφῆται 2. προφῆται

πίστις διδάσκαλοι διδάσκαλοι

3. διδασκαλία εὐαγγελισταί

παράκλησις ποιμένες καὶ

μεταδιδόναι 3. διδάσκαλοι

προΐστασθαι

It will be observed that in four of the lists there are at least two gifts which are not-mentioned in the other lists: in 1Co 12:8-10, πίστις and διάκρισις πνευμάτων; in 12:28, ἀντιλήμψεις and κυβερνήσεις: in Rom 12:6-8, διακονία, παράκλησις, μεταδιδόναι, and προΐ́στασθαι: and in Eph 4:11, εὐαγγελισταί and ποιμένες, if ποιμένες is a separate class from ο͂ιδάσκαλοι. We must not assume that in all cases the difference of name means a difference of gift or of function. We may tentatively identify διακονία with ἀντίλημψις, and οί προιστάμενοι with κυβερνήσεις, and perhaps with ποιμενες. We have St Paul’s own authority for placing ἀπόστολοι, προφῆται, and διδάσκαλοι above all the rest, and in that order; and for placing γένη γλωσσῶν with έρμηνεία γλωσσῶν last. Taking 12:28 as our guide, we notice that, of the nine gifts enumerated, three are those in which teaching is the common element, two are wonder-working, two are administrative, and two are ecstatic. The three pairs are valuable, especially the first two, yet they are not indispensable: but powers of teaching are indispensable. If there is no one to teach with sureness and authority, the Christian Church cannot be built up and cannot grow. But it must be remembered once more that we are treating of various gifts bestowed upon various persons, some of whom had more than one gift, and that some Christians had no special endowment. We are not dealing with classes of officials, each with definite functions; munus in the sense of donum has not yet passed into munus in the sense of officium, and the process of transition has scarcely begun. In correcting the errors into which the Corinthians had fallen, the Apostle does not tell any officials to take action, but addresses the congregation as a whole. The inference is that there were no officials in the ecclesiastical sense, although, as in every society, there were lending men. See Ency. Bibl. I. 1038, III. 3108, IV. 4759; Hastings, DB. III. 377); Hort, Chr. Eccles. pp. 203f.

Novatian (De Trinitate XXIX.) paraphrases this passage thus; Hic est enim qui prophetas in ecclesia constituit, magistros erudit, linguos dirigit, virtutes et sanitates facit, opera mirabilia gerit, discretiones spirituum porrigit, gubernationes contribuit, consilia suggerit, quaeque alia sunt charismatune dona componit et digerit; et ideo ecclesiam domini undique et in omnibus perfectam et consummatam facit; where (as in 9. and 12.) Novatian evidently uses sanitales in the sense of ‘cures’.

On our scanty knowledge of the organization of the Apostolic Churches see Gwatkin, Early Church History, i. pp. 64-72.

ADDITIONAL NOTE ON 12:3

If the theory is correct that the Christ party were docetisls, who used the name of Christ in opposition, not merely to the names of Paul, Apollos, and Kephas, but also to the name of Jesus, then the cry ‘Jesus be anathema’ might express their contempt for ‘knowing Christ after the flesh.’ They would have nothing to do with any external or material reality, and in this spirit perhaps denied that there could be any resurrection of the body, either in the case of Christ or of any one else. See B. W. Bacon, Introd. to N.T. p. 92. There may have been docetisls at Corinth, whether they belonged to the Christ party or not.

* This is one of the places inw hich the old ilerative force of ἄν seems to servive in the N.T. Comp. Act 2:45, Act 4:35. J. H. Moulton, P. 167.

* “Much of the immorality which St Paul so graphically describes was associated with religious worship. So that the Apostle assigns as the cause of the universal condition of moral corruption in the world the universal prevalence not so much of no religion as of false religion” (Du, Bose, The Gospel according to St Paul, P. 63). On the idea of Christian ceasing to belong to the ἔθνη see Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity, 1. pp. 60, 89.

אԠא (Fourth century.) The Sinaitic MS., now at St Petersburg, the only MS. containing the whole N.T.

A A (Fifth century.) The Codex Alexandrinus; now at the British Museum.

B B (Fourth century.) The Vatican MS.

C C (Fifth century). The Codex Ephraem, a Palimpsest; now at Paris. Lacks 7:18 ἐν ἀκροβυστίᾳ-9:6 τοῦ μὴ ἐργάζεσθαι: 13:8 παύσονται-14:40 ἀλλὰ ἕτερα.

D D (Sixth century.) Codex Clarmontanus; now at Paris. A Graeco-Latin MS. 14:13 διο͂ ὁ λαλῶν-22 σημεῖον ἐστίν is supplied by a later but ancient hand. Many subsequent hands (sixth to ninth centuries) have corrected the MS. (See Gregory, Prolegomena , pp. 418-422).

E E (Ninth century). At Petrograd. A copy of D, and unimportant

L L (Ninth century). Codex Angelicus; At Rome.

P P (Ninth century). Porfirianus Chiovensis. A palimpsest acquired in the East by Porphyrius Bishop of Kiew. Lacks 7:15 ὑμᾶς ὁ θεός-17 περιπάτει: 12:23 τοῦ σώματος-13:5 οὐ λογί-: 14:23 τὸ λαλεῖν μή. A good type of text in St Paul’s Epistles.

† Chrysostom thinks that he is contrasting Christian inspiration with the frenzy of the Dionysiac and other mysteries; this may be true in part.

*

Origen says that the Ophites required this utterance from those who joined them. ἔστι τις αἵρεσις ἥτις οὐ προσίεται τὸν προσιόντα εἰ μὴ ἀναθεματίσῃ τὸν Ἰησοῦν. see JTS. x. 37, P. 30.

Here the RV, is right in making ‘Jesus is anathema’ and ‘Jesus is Lord’ the oratio recta : א A B C have ἀνάθεμα Ἰησοῦς, not Ἰησοῦν, and Κύριος Ἰησοῦς, not Κύριον Ἰησοῦν.

* Our Lord uses a similar argument (Mar 9:39; Luk 9:50). It is quite possible that, at baptism, the convert made some short confession of faith such as Κύριος Ἰησοῦς. He confessed the Name, when he was baptized in the Name

† It is frequent in LXX, especially in Chronicles, of the ‘courses of priests, Levites, and troops.

* Comp. Maharbal’s words to Hannibal; Non omnia nimirum eidem dii dedere (Livy, xxii. 51).

K K (Ninth century). Codex S. Synod. xcviii. Lacks 1:1-6:13 ταύτην καί: 8:7 τινὲς δὲ—8:11 ἀπέθανεν.

F F (Late ninth century). Codex Augiensis (from Reichenau); now at Trin. Coll. Cambr. Probably a copy of G in any case, secondary to G, from which it very rarely varies (see Gregory, p. 429).

G G (Late ninth century). Codex Boernerianus; at Dresden. Interlined with the Latin (in minluscules). Lacks 1Co 3:8-16, 1Co 6:7-14 (F).

*

Harnack holds that St Luke was ”a physician endowed with peculiar ‘spiritual’ gifts of healing, and this fact profoundly affects his conception of Christianity” (The Acts of the Apostles, p. 133). Again, “whose own we account shows him to have been a physician endowed with miraculous gifts of healings” (P. 143; comp. P. 146).

It is remarkable that although there are allusions to signs and wonders in the Apostolic age (2Co 12:12; Gal 3:5; Rom 15:19; Heb 2:4), there is no allusion to miracles wronught by Christ. It cannot be said that in the age in which the Gospels werer being framed there was a tendency to glorify christ by attributing miracles to Him. See L. Ragg, The Book of Books P. 221.

* St Paul commonly uses ἐνεργεῖν with a personal subject (v. 6; Gal 2:8, Gal 2:3:5; Eph 1:11, Eph 1:20, Eph 1:2:2, as here; Php 2:13), but ἐνεργεῖσθαι with an impersonal subject (Rom 7:5; 2Co 1:6, 2Co 1:4:12; Gal 5:6; Eph 3:20; Col 1:29; 1Th 2:13; 2Th 2:7). See J. A. Robinson, Ephesians, p. 246. See also Basil, De Spir. xvi. 37, xxvi. 61, and Ep. xxxviii. 4.

* The Emperor Marcus Aurelius frequently insists on this; Γεγόναμεν γὰρ πρὸς συνεργίαν, ὡς πόδες, ὡς χεῖρες ὡς βλέθαρα, ὡς οἱ στοῖχοι τῶν ἄνω καὶ τῶν κάτω ὀδόντων· τὸ οὖν ἀντιπράσσειν ἀλλήλοις παρὰ φύσιν (2:1). Τὰ λογικὰ ζῶα ἀλλήλων ἕνεκεν γέγονε (4:3). Οἶόν ἐστι ἐν ἡνωμένοις τὰ μέλη τοῦ σώματος, τοῦτον ἐχει τὸν λόγον ἐν διεστῶσι τὰ λογικὰ, πρὸς μίαν τινὰ συνεργίαν κατεσκευασμένα (7:13).

* M. Aurelius, as we have seen, says that we are made to co-operate with one another, as feet, and hands, and eyelids, and upper and lower jaws. To act in opposition to one another is unnatural (2:1). Socrates points out how monstrous it would be if hands and feet, which God made to work in harmony, were to thwart and impede one another (Xen. Mem. II. iii. 18).

*

Wetstein quotes Quintilian, viii. 5; Neque oculos esse toto corpore velim, ne caetera membra suum officium perdant. Cic. De Off. i. 35; Principio corporis nostri magnam natura ipsa videtur habuisse rationem, quae formam nostram, reliquamque figuram, in qua esset species honesta, eam posuit in promptu ; quae partes autem corporis ad naturae necessitatem datae adspectumessent deformen habiturae atque turpem, eas contexit atque abdidit. De Off,. iii. 5; Si unumquodgue membrum sensum hunc haberet, ut posse putaret se valere, si proximi membri valetudinem ad se traduxisset, debilitari el interire totum corpus necesse est.

Primasius turns v. 17 thus; Si toti docentes, ubi auditores? Si toti auditores, quis sciret discernere bonum vet malum?

* Atto of Vercelli illustrates this principle by the honour which is paid to those who, out of humility, go bare-footed and wear shabby clothing

* “One of the most remarkable sides of the history of Rome is the growth of ideas which found their realization and completion in the Christian Empire. Universal citizenship, universal equality, universal religion, a unlversal Church, all were ideas which the Empire was slowly working out, but which it could not realize till it merged itself in Christianity” (Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, p. 192).

* “It is impossible to determine exactly how eople were recognized as teachers. One clue, however, seems visible in Jas 3:1. From this it follows that to become a teacher was a matter of personal choice-based, of course, upon the individual’s consciousness of possessing a charisma’ (Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity, I. p. 336; p. 243. ed. 1902). The whole chapter (1st of the 3rd Book) should be read. It shows that the order ‘Apostles, prophets, and teachers’ is very early. “St Paul is thinking without doubt of some arrangement in the Church which held good among Jewish Christian communities founded apart from his co-operation, no less than among the communities of Greece and Asia Minor.”

* The shortness of the list of charismata in Eph 4:11 as compared with the list here is perhaps an indication that the regular exercise of extraordinary gifts in public worship was already dying out. Hastings, DB. III. p. 141.

† Wetstein quotes Quintilian, viii. 5; Neque oculos esse toto corpore velim, ne caetera membra suum officium perdant. Cic. De Off. i. 35; Principio corporis nostri magnam natura ipsa videtur habuisse rationem, quae formam nostram, reliquamque figuram, in qua esset species honesta, eam posuit in promptu; quae partes autem corporis ad naturae necessitatem datae adspectumessent deformen habiturae atque turpem, eas contexit atque abdidit. De Off,. iii. 5; Si unumquodgue membrum sensum hunc haberet, ut posse putaret se valere, si proximi membri valetudinem ad se traduxisset, debilitari el interire totum corpus necesse est. Primasius turns v. 17 thus; Si toti docentes, ubi auditores? Si toti auditores, quis sciret discernere bonum vet malum?

* Comp. the use of ἡ ὸδός, ‘the Way’ par excellence, for Christianity (Act 9:2, Act 9:19:9, Act 9:23, Act 9:22:4, Act 9:24:14, Act 9:22). Bengel has via maxime vialis. it has the true characteristic of a way in perfection.

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

Vv. 3. With this diabolical, capricious, and blind impulse, Paul contrasts the new breath with which the Holy Spirit penetrates the Church, a breath which has a fixed and glorious object, the Lord Jesus, and which, acting on the depths of the consciousness, gives rise to a new utterance in him who is animated by it. Heinrici, following Griesbach and Storr, thinks that the apostle means here to defend the gift of tongues against its detractors. After alluding to the oracles and deceptions of heathen priests, in 1Co 12:2, he now passes, they hold, to the effects of Christian inspiration, which, while offering some analogy to these heathen manifestations, ought yet to be carefully distinguished from them. No doubt the discourses in tongues are unintelligible, and there might be a fear of their containing some blasphemy against Jesus Christ. But this fear may be dismissed, for the Holy Spirit can inspire with nothing which is contrary to the glory of the Lord Jesus.

It is impossible not to feel the very artificial and forced character of this connection between 1Co 12:2-3. Besides, we shall see that in this whole section, chaps. 12-14, Paul is speaking, not to exalt the gift of tongues, but, on the contrary, to combat the exaggerated value given to it. This introduction, 1Co 12:1-3, is still quite general, and has no special relation to the gift of speaking in tongues. De Wette seems to me to have apprehended the context better: “As Gentiles, you acted without consciousness and without personal judgment; but now, as Christians, the time is come for your knowing how to regulate yourselves; and hence I make known to you the true principle by which you ought to judge all manifestations of this kind.” But this transition is not enough. We must go more to the root of the matter, and not confine ourselves to the contrast between the blind passivity of the heathen state and the full personal consciousness of the Christian state. For this characteristic of superiority would apply only imperfectly to the gift of tongues, the exercise of which excludes the use of the faculty of the νοῦς, the understanding (1Co 14:14). The real transition seems to me rather to be this: “In your former heathen state you had no experience whatever similar to that which you now have in the Church. The dumb idols, to the worship of which you let yourself be carried, did not communicate powers similar to those which the Spirit now communicates to you. Consequently, novices as you are in this domain, you need a guiding thread to prevent you from going astray: This is why I instruct you....” (Comp. Meyer.)

The first thing needed by a Church so inexperienced in this domain was to know how far it extended, in other words, what was the true character of the Divine influence; who was truly inspired and who was not. The apostle answers this first question by two maxims, the one negative, exclusive; the other positive, affirmative. The character of Divine inspiration does not depend on the form which the discourse takes, but on its tendency. Whether it be a prophecy, a tongue, or a doctrine, matters little; every utterance which amounts to saying: Jesus be accursed! is not Divinely inspired; every utterance which amounts to saying: Jesus Lord! is Divinely inspired. It should be remarked that Paul here says Jesus, and not Christ. His concern is with the historical person who lived on the earth under the name of Jesus. It is with Him that all true inspiration is bound up; it is from Him that all carnal or diabolical inspiration turns away. Jesus had said: “Father, all Thine is Mine, and all Mine is Thine” (Joh 17:10), and “The Spirit of truth shall glorify Me; He shall take of Mine and show it unto you.” No utterance whatever, degrading the man who is called Jesus, however eloquent and powerful, emanates from Divine inspiration. Every utterance glorifying the man Jesus, however weak and unpretending, proceeds from the breath from on high. According to the Greco-Lats., the Byz., and the T. R., we should read: ἀνάθεμα ᾿Ιησοῦν (sayeth that Jesus is accursed), and κύριον ᾿Ιησοῦν (sayeth that Jesus is the Lord). According to the Alex. and the Peschito, the word Jesus is in the nominative: ἀνάθεμα ᾿Ιησοῦς and κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς; it is each time an exclamation: Jesus accursed! Jesus Lord! Clearly this second reading is the only possible one. Exclamation, much more than cold logical statement, is the language of inspired discourse, the characteristic of which is enthusiasm. In classical Greek the word ἀνάθεμα is synonymous with ἀνάθημα, and denotes every object consecrated to deity. But in the LXX. and in the New Testament it takes a particular sense, denoting an object consecrated to God in order to its destruction, a being devoted to be cursed (Deu 7:26; Jos 7:13, etc.; Gal 1:8); while ἀνάθημα preserves the meaning of offering sensu bono; comp. Luk 21:5.

But to whom in the Christian Church can the apostle attribute the language: Jesus accursed! It has been supposed—as is still done by Holsten—that the apostle here refers to discourses hostile to Jesus which were heard from the lips of Jews or even from those of unbelieving Gentiles, who treated Jesus as an impostor, and saw in His ignominious and cruel death a token of the Divine curse. Comp. 1Co 1:23 : to the Jews a stumbling-block. There might thus be found in this passage the three great religious domains of the time, heathenism (1Co 12:2), Judaism (1Co 12:3 a), and Christianity (1Co 12:3 b). But the construction of the sentence does not lend itself to such parallelism. And the question arises, How could the Church of Corinth have been tempted to ascribe such discourses to Divine inspiration? Besides, we have to do here with discourses uttered in the assemblies of the Church; and how would men have been allowed to speak publicly in the Church who were not Christians? One would rather suppose, as Heinrici seems to do, that this first purely negative rule is not meant by the apostle to apply to any real case, and that he has put it down only the better to bring out the idea of the second by way of contrast. But neither is this explanation admissible; for these two criteria are so placed in relation to one another, that the real application of the one implies also that of the other. Must we then believe that Paul admits the possibility of such discourses within the Church itself? When Heinrici declares this supposition absurd, does he transport himself adequately into the midst of the powerful fermentation of religious ideas then called forth by the gospel? In 2Co 11:3-4, the apostle speaks of teachers newly arrived at Corinth, who preached another Jesus than the one he had preached, and who raised a different spirit from that which the Church had received. It was therefore not only another doctrine, but also another breath, a new principle of inspiration, which these people brought with them. In our Epistle itself, 1Co 16:22, he speaks of certain persons who love not Jesus Christ, and whom he devotes to anathema when the Lord shall come. These utterances would appear very severe, if they were not a sort of return for the anathema which these people threw in the face of Jesus Christ. How was this possible in a Christian Church? We must observe, first of all, the term Jesus, denoting the historical and earthly person of our Lord, and bear in mind that from the earliest times there were people who, offended at the idea of the ignominious punishment of the cross, and the unheard -of abasement of the Son of God, thought they must set up a distinction between the man Jesus and the true Christ. The first had been, according to them, a pious Jew. A heavenly being, the true Christ, had chosen him to serve as His organ while He acted here below as the Saviour of humanity. But this Christ from above had parted from Jesus before the Passion, and left the latter to suffer and die alone. It is easy to see how, from this point of view, one might curse the crucified one who appeared to have been cursed of God on the cross, and that without thinking he was cursing the true Saviour and Christ, and while remaining without scruple a member of the Church. We know the name of a man who positively taught the doctrine we speak of. He was a Jew-Christian, named Cerinthus, very much attached to the law like the adversaries of Paul at Corinth; and it is curious to hear a Father of the Church, Epiphanius, affirm that the First Epistle to the Corinthians was written against this person. We shall not go so far. We would only use the example to show what strange conceptions might arise at this period when Christian doctrine was yet in process of formation, and when all the ideas awakened by the gospel were seething within the Church. To the example of Cerinthus we can add that of the Ophites, or serpent-worshippers, who existed before the end of the first century, and who, according to Origen (Contra Celsum), asked those who wished to enter their churches to curse Jesus. In stating this first negative criterion, the apostle therefore means to say to the Corinthians: However ecstatic in form, or profound in matter, may be a spiritual manifestation, tongue, prophecy, or doctrine, if it tends to degrade jesus, to make Him an impostor or a man worthy of the Divine wrath, if it does violence in any way to His holiness, you may be sure the inspiring breath of such a discourse is not that of God’s Spirit. Such is the decisive standard which the prophets, for example, are summoned to use when they sit in judgment on one another (1Co 14:29).

After drawing the line fitted to set aside all that presents itself as Christian inspiration without being so in fact, the apostle points out the characteristic common to all those manifestations to which the quality of a true inspiration can and should be accorded, whatever may be the form in which they show themselves. To proclaim Jesus as the Lord; such is the mark of every Divinely inspired Christian discourse. Such a discourse is a cry of adoration, an act of homage by which the historical person who bore the name of Jesus, notwithstanding His shame and bloody death, is raised by the inspired one to the Divine throne, and celebrated as the Being who exercises universal sovereignty; such is the force of the title κύριος, Lord; comp. Php 2:9-11. It might be objected to the apostle that there are professions of faith in Jesus Christ which are purely intellectual, orthodox sermons which are devoid of the breath of the Spirit. But this objection has no force whatever in the context, especially with the reading κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς (nominatives), which we have adopted, and which makes these words an exclamation. Such a cry of the heart does not in the least resemble a cold logical affirmation. We might object, with more show of reason, the exclamation of the demons who cried out on seeing Jesus: “Thou art the Holy One of God.” But this emotion of fear and this particular insight might well be, even in those beings, an effect of the Spirit’s influence; comp. Jas 2:19. It is the Holy Spirit who gives to an intelligent spirit the discernment of the holiness of Jesus. Thus, however simple, however elementary in matter a Christian discourse may be, however calm, however sober in form, if its result is to place on the head of Jesus the crown of Lord, it is the product of the Divine Spirit, as well as the most extraordinary manifestation which can take place in a Christian assembly.

The field of Divine inspirations is thus marked off by a line of demarcation which every believer can apply. The apostle now explains the relation which those various manifestations of the Christian Spirit, that are embraced in it, sustain to one another. He first expounds the idea, that however various those manifestations may be in their outward form, they are one in their principle and end (1Co 12:4-12).

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.

1Co_12:3

Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and (that) no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

Wherefore, i.e. because I would not have you ignorant on this subject. The first thing which he teaches is the criterion or test of true divine influence. This criterion he states first negatively and then positively. The negative statement is, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed. To speak by (or in) the Spirit, is to speak under the influence of the Spirit, as the ancient prophets did. Mat_22:43. Mar_12:36. No one speaking (λαλῶν, using his voice), calleth (λέγει pronounces) Jesus to be accursed. Or, according to another reading, utters the words, Jesus is accursed. By Jesus, the historical person known among men by that name is indicated. And, therefore, Paul uses that word and not Christ, which is a term of office. Accursed, i.e. anathema. This word properly means something consecrated to God; and as among the Jews what was thus consecrated could not be redeemed, but, if a living thing, must be put to death, Lev_27:28, Lev_27:29, hence the word was used to designate any person or thing devoted to destruction; and then with the accessory idea of the divine displeasure, something devoted to destruction as accursed. This last is its uniform meaning in the New Testament. Rom_9:3. Gal_1:8, Gal_1:9; 1Co_16:22. Hence to say that Jesus is anathema, is to say he was a malefactor, one just condemned to death. This the Jews said who invoked his blood upon their heads. The affirmative statement is, no man can say Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. The word κύριος, Lord, is that by which the word Jehovah is commonly rendered in the Greek version of the Old Testament. To say Jesus is the Lord, therefore, in the sense of the apostle, is to acknowledge him to be truly God. And as the word Jesus here as before designates the historical person known by that name, who was born of the Virgin Mary, to say that Jesus is Lord, is to acknowledge that that person is God manifest in the flesh. In other words, the confession includes the acknowledgment that he is truly God and truly man. What the apostle says, is that no man can make this acknowledgment but by the Holy Ghost. This of course does not mean that no one can utter these words unless under special divine influence; but it means that no one can truly believe and openly confess that Jesus is God manifest in the flesh unless he is enlightened by the Spirit of God. This is precisely what our Lord himself said, when Peter confessed him to be the Son of God. Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven. Mat_16:17. The same thing is also said by the apostle John. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God; every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God, 1Jo_4:2, 1Jo_4:3; and in 1Jo_4:15, Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. To blaspheme Christ, maledicere Christo, Plin. Epist. X. 97, was the form for renouncing Christianity before the Roman tribunals; and saying, I believe that Jesus is the Son of God, Act_8:37, was the form of professing allegiance to Christ. Men acknowledged themselves to be Christians, by acknowledging the divinity of Christ. These passages, therefore, teach us first, whom we are to regard as Christians, viz., those who acknowledge and worship Jesus of Nazareth as the true God; secondly, that the test of the divine commission of those who assume to be teachers of the gospel, is not external descent, or apostolic succession, but soundness in the faith. If even an apostle or angel teach any other gospel, we are to regard him as accursed, Gal_1:8. And Paul tells the Corinthians that they were to discriminate between those who were really the organs of the Holy Ghost, and those who falsely pretended to that office, by the same criterion. As it is unscriptural to recognize as Christians those who deny the divinity of our Lord; so it is unscriptural for any man to doubt his own regeneration, if he is conscious that he sincerely worships the Lord Jesus.

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

Doth curse him, only any means whatsoever diminish his glory.

The conclusion: Know you therefore, that you cannot so much as move your lips to honor Christ withall, but by the grace of the holy Ghost.

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

The negative and positive criteria of inspiration by the Spirit--the rejection or confession of Jesus as Lord [ALFORD] (Jo1 4:2; Jo1 5:1). Paul gives a test of truth against the Gentiles; John, against the false prophets.

by the Spirit--rather, as Greek, "IN the Spirit"; that being the power pervading him, and the element in which he speaks [ALFORD], (Mat 16:17; Joh 15:26).

of God . . . Holy--The same Spirit is called at one time "the Spirit of GOD"; at another, "the HOLY Ghost," or "Holy Spirit." Infinite Holiness is almost synonymous with Godhead.

speaking . . . say--"Speak" implies the act of utterance; "say" refers to that which is uttered. Here, "say" means a spiritual and believing confession of Him.

Jesus--not an abstract doctrine, but the historical, living God-man (Rom 10:9).

accursed--as the Jews and Gentiles treated Him (Gal 3:13). Compare "to curse Christ" in the heathen PLINY'S letter [Epistles, 10.97]. The spiritual man feels Him to be the Source of all blessings (Eph 1:3) and to be severed from Him is to be accursed (Rom 9:3).

Lord--acknowledging himself as His servant (Isa 26:13). "Lord" is the Septuagint translation for the incommunicable Hebrew name JEHOVAH.

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 3. No man speaking by the Spirit of God] It was granted on all hands that there could be no religion without Divine inspiration, because God alone, could make his will known to men: hence heathenism pretended to this inspiration; Judaism had it in the law and the prophets; and it was the very essence of the Christian religion. The heathen priests and priestesses pretended to receive, by inspiration from their god, the answers which they gave to their votaries. And as far as the people believed their pretensions, so far they were led by their teaching.

Both Judaism and heathenism were full of expectations of a future teacher and deliverer; and to this person, especially among the Jews, the Spirit in all the prophets gave witness. This was the Anointed One, the Messiah who was manifested in the person of Jesus of Nazareth; and him the Jews rejected, though he proved his Divine mission both by his doctrines and his miracles. But as he did not come as they fancied he would-as a mighty secular conqueror, they not only rejected but blasphemed him; and persons among them professing to be spiritual men, and under the influence of the Spirit of God, did so. But as the Holy Spirit, through all the law and the prophets gave Testimony to the Messiah, and as Jesus proved himself to be the Christ both by his miracles and doctrines, no man under the inspiration of the Divine Spirit could say to him anethema-thou art a deceiver, and a person worthy of death, c., as the Jews did: therefore the Jews were no longer under the inspiration of the Spirit of God. This appears to be the meaning of the apostle in this place. No man speaking by the Spirit, &c.

And that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord] Nor can we demonstrate this person to be the Messiah and the Saviour of men, but by the Holy Ghost, enabling us to speak with divers tongues, to work miracles he attesting the truth of our doctrines to them that hear, by enlightening their minds, changing their hearts, and filling them with the peace and love of God.

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

3. Wherefore I give you to know. Having admonished them from their own experience, he sets before them a general doctrine, which he deduces from it; for what the Corinthians had experienced in themselves is common to all mankind — to wander on in error, previously to their being brought back, through the kindness of God, into the way of truth. Hence it is necessary that we should be directed by the Spirit of God, or we shall wander on for ever. From this, too, it follows, that all things that pertain to the true knowledge of God, are the gifts of the Holy Spirit,. He at the same time derives an argument from opposite causes to opposite effects. No one, speaking by the Spirit of God, can revile Christ; so, on the other hand, no one can speak well of Christ, but by the Spirit of Christ. To say that Jesus is accursed is utter blasphemy against him. To say that Jesus is the Lord, is to speak of him in honorable terms and with reverence, and to extol his majesty.

Here it is asked — “As the wicked sometimes speak of Christ in honorable and magnificent terms, is this an indication that they have the Spirit of God?” I answer — “They undoubtedly have, so far as that effect is concerned; but the gift of regeneration is one thing, and the gift of bare intelligence, with which Judas himself was endowed, when he preached the gospel, is quite another.” Hence, too, we perceive how great our weakness is, as we cannot so much as move our tongue for the celebration of God’s praise, unless it be governed by his Spirit. Of this the Scripture, also, frequently reminds us, and the saints everywhere acknowledge that unless the Lord open their mouths, they are not fit to be the heralds of his praise. Among others, Isaiah says — I am a man of unclean lips, etc. (Isaiah 6:5.)

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.

(3) Wherefore I give you to understand.—Better, Wherefore I make known unto you. Because such was your condition, and there still seems to linger in your minds some of the ignorance which belonged to such a state, I make known unto you the one great test of your possession of the Holy Spirit. If any man say “Jesus is anathema,” that is a proof that he has not that Spirit. If any man say “Jesus is Lord,” that is a proof that he has that Spirit.

(3) Operating in words, as in prophetic utterances.

(4) Operating in distinguishing true and false spirits.

III. Gifts which relate to tongues.

(1) Speaking with tongues.

(2) Interpreting tongues.

The “wisdom” and the “knowledge” differ, in that the former expresses the deep spiritual insight into spiritual truth which some possess, the latter the intellectual appreciation of Christian doctrine, which is not so profound as the former, and which as the man passes into the spiritual state will vanish away (1Co_13:8).

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3. Wherefore] The connection of thought is as follows. When you were heathen you were carried hither and thither by the pretended utterances of your gods, and believed whatever they might tell you. But now you must no longer be the sport of circumstances. There are certain fundamental principles by which you may try the utterances of those who would teach you. Cf. an extremely similar passage in 1Jn_4:1-3. This caution was very necessary in the infant Church. In spite of the warnings of St Paul and St John, many were entrapped by the blasphemous ravings of men like Simon Magus, Menander and the Ophites (or Naassenes, worshippers of the serpent), as we learn from the writings of Irenaeus and Hippolytus. Cf. 1Jn_2:19.

by the Spirit of God] Literally, in the Spirit; i.e. inspired by Him.

accursed] Margin (and Greek), anathema. See note on ch. 1Co_16:22.

that Jesus is the Lord] Perhaps, Jesus Is Lord, or Lord Jesus.

but by the Holy Ghost] Literally, in the Holy Ghost (or Spirit), see above. Not a single true word can be spoken but by the agency of the Spirit of God. As far as the confession that Jesus is Lord goes, he who makes it is under the influence of the Holy Ghost. It is remarkable that St Paul has in mind in this passage those who deny the Divinity of Christ; St John, in the similar passage just quoted, the sects, which arose afterwards, who denied His Humanity.

4 gifts] χαρίσματα, ch. 1Co_7:7, special powers vouchsafed by God, In addition to the ordinary ‘fruit of the Spirit,’ Gal_5:22, which last was within the reach of every Christian who would use ordinary diligence. Cf. Rom_12:6-8, 1Pe_4:10-11, where the same word is used as here.

but the same Spirit] The unity of the source is strongly insisted upon, to put an end to the mutual jealousy of the Corinthians. And it is remarkable that each person in the Blessed Trinity is introduced to emphasize the argument, and in contrary order (as Estius remarks), in order to lead us step by step to the One Source of all. First the Spirit, Who bestows the ‘gifts’ on the believer. Next the Lord, to Whom men render service in His Church. Lastly God the Father, from Whom all proceeds, Whose are all the works which are done to Him and in His Name. Cf. ch. 1Co_3:7; 1Co_3:9; 1Co_3:23, 1Co_8:6.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Wherefore I give you to understand,.... Or "I make known unto you"; what I am about to say are certain truths, and to be depended on,

that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed; or "anathema", as did the unconverted Gentiles, who knew nothing of Jesus but by report; which report they had from the Jews, his enemies; and by that report he appeared to them to be a very wicked and detestable person, who was put to death by the means of his own countrymen, was hanged upon a tree, and so to be counted and called accursed: the apostle seems to have reference to the sense these Corinthians had of Jesus, and what they called him before their conversion; whence it appeared that they spoke not by, nor were they possessed of the Spirit of God then, and therefore their having of him now was an instance of pure grace; or else respect is had to the Jews, who not only, whilst Jesus was living, blasphemed him, but continued to call him accursed after his death, whilst they were in their own land; and after the destruction of their city and temple, they continued, as Justin Martyr observes (a) to Trypho the Jew, to "curse" Christ, and them that believed in him; and to this day privately call him by such names as will hardly bear to be mentioned, were it not for the explanation of such a passage: thus they (b) call him "Jesus the perverse", or he that perverteth the law of God; and "Jesu", the name they commonly give him, they say is the abbreviation of , "let his name and memory be blotted out"; and which they sometimes explain by "Jesu is a lie, and an abomination: they call him a strange God, and vanity" (c), and often by the name of (d), "one that was hanged", and so with them accursed; and which seems to be the name the Jews, in the apostle's time, gave him, and to which he here refers. Now, as in the former verse he may have regard to the Gentiles, so in this to the Jews in this church, who, before conversion, had so called Christ, when it was plain they had not the Spirit of God then, or they could not have so called him; and therefore if they were partakers of him now, they ought to admire divine grace, and not glory in themselves, and over others. Dr. Lightfoot thinks, that Jewish exorcists who strolled about, and pretended to do miracles by the Holy Ghost, and yet called Jesus "anathema", are meant, of whom the Corinthians might assure themselves that they did not speak, nor act, nor were acted by the Spirit of God. The words may be applied to all such as detest and deny the doctrines of Christ, respecting his person and office; as that he is come in the flesh, is the true Messiah, the Son of God, truly and properly God; that his death is a proper sacrifice, and full satisfaction for sin; and that justification is by his imputed righteousness: without any breach of charity it may be said, such persons do in effect call Jesus accursed, nullifying his person, sufferings, and death, as to the dignity and efficacy of them; and cannot be thought to have, and speak by, the Spirit of God, who if they had him, would teach them otherwise. Moreover, as the word "anathema" here used answers to "Cherem", a form of excommunication among the Jews; it may be truly said that such call Jesus accursed, or "anathema", who, if I may be allowed the expression, excommunicate him out of their sermons and faith; these crucify him afresh, trample him under foot, count his blood as a common thing, and do malice to his Spirit; and therefore cannot be thought to have him, and speak by him.

And that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost; or Jehovah; which, with the Jews, was a name ineffable, to which the apostle might have respect. Christ is Lord of all, of angels, good and bad; of men, righteous and wicked; of the chief among men, the kings, princes, and lords of the earth; as he is God by right of nature, and as Creator of them by virtue of that; and because of his providential power and influence in the government of the universe; he is Lord of his church and people, by the Father's gift of them to him; by his espousal of them to himself; by the purchase of his blood; and by the conquests of his grace; and as appears by the various relations he stands in to them, as father, husband, head, King, and master. Now, though a man may historically say all this, as the devils may, and hypocritically, as formal professors and foolish virgins do now, and will at the last day; and as all men then will by force, whether they will or not, confess that Jesus is Lord, who have not the Spirit of God; yet no man can call him his Lord, can appropriate him to himself truly and really, as his Lord, Saviour, and Redeemer, as David, Thomas, the Apostle Paul, and others have done; but by the Spirit; since such an appropriation includes spiritual knowledge of Christ, strong affection to him; faith of interest in him, an hearty profession of him, and sincere subjection to him; all which cannot be without the Spirit of God: for he is the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him; and true love to Christ is a genuine fruit of his; faith in Christ, is entirely of his operation; and a subjection to the righteousness of Christ, and to his ordinances, is through the influence of his grace; and it is owing to his witnessings that any can truly, and in faith, claim their interest in him. Upon the whole, the apostle's sense is, let a man pretend to what he will, if he does not love Jesus Christ, and believe in him, he is destitute of his Spirit; and whoever loves Christ, and believes in him, and can call him his Lord in faith and fear, however mean otherwise his gifts may be, he is a partaker of the Spirit of God.

(a) Dialog. cum Tryph. p. 335. (b) Buxtorf. Abbrev. p. 10. (c) Buxtorf. Abbrev. p. 101, 102, 103. (d) Ib. Lex. Talmud. col. 2596.

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

3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

Ver. 3. Calleth Jesus accursed] As the wicked Jews do in this day in their daily prayers and abbreviature; and as the Gentiles did of old, and these Corinthians among the rest. But now they would rather die than do so; as Pliny writes to Trajan the emperor, that he could never force any that were Christians indeed, either to invocate the gods, or to do sacrifice before the emperor’s image, or to curse Christ, Quorum nihil cogi posse dicuntur qui sunt revera Christiani. (Plin. Epist.)

And that no man can say, &c.] That is, no man can, with the fiducial assent of his heart, acknowledge Christ to be the only Lord, whom he is to worship by the same impulsions, by which another curses aud blasphemes him, but by such peculiar motives as are suggested and revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost.

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.

Wherefore I give you to understand - I make known to you. The force of this expression is, “I give you this rule to distinguish,” or by which you may know what influences and operations are from God. The design of the passage is, to give them some simple general guide by which they could at once recognize the operations of the Spirit of God, and determine whether they who claimed to be under that operation were really so. That rule was, that all who were truly influenced by the Holy Spirit would be disposed to acknowledge and to know Jesus Christ; and where this disposition existed, it was of itself a clear demonstration that it was the operation of the Spirit of God. The same rule substantially is given by John 1Jo 4:2, by which to test the nature of the spirit by which people profess to be influenced. “Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God,” compare also the note to Mat 16:17.

That no man - No one οἰδεὶς oideis. It may refer to a man, or to demons, or to those who pretended to be under inspiration of any kind. And it may refer to the Jews who may have pretended to be under the influence of God’s Spirit. and who yet anathematized and cursed the name of Jesus. Or it may be intended simply as a general rule; meaning that “if anyone,” whoever he might be, should blaspheme the name of Jesus, whatever were his pretensions, whether professing to be under the influence of the Holy Spirit among the Jews, or to be inspired among the Gentiles, it was full proof that he was an impostor. The argument is, that the Holy Spirit in all instances would do honor to Jesus Christ, and would prompt all who were under his influence to love and reverence his name.

Speaking by the Spirit of God - Under the influence of inspiration.

Calleth - Says, or would say; that is, no such one would use the language of anathema in regard to him.

Accursed - Margin, “Anathema” (ἀνάθημα anathēma); see the Act 23:14 note; Rom 9:3 note; compare 1Co 16:22; Gal 1:8-9. The word is one of execration, or cursing; and means, that no one under the influence of the Holy Spirit could curse the name of Jesus, or denounce him as execrable and as an impostor. The effect of the influences of the Spirit would be in all instances to inspire reverence for his name and work. It is probable that the Jews were here principally intended, since there is a bitterness and severity in the language which accords with all their expressions of feeling toward Jesus of Nazareth. It is possible, also, and indeed probable, that the priests and priestesses of the pagan gods who pretended to be under the influence of inspiration might denounce the name of Jesus, because they would all be opposed to the purity of his religion.

And that no man can say ... - That is, that it cannot occur, or even happen, that anyone will acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah who is not influenced by the Holy Spirit. The meaning is, not that no one has physical ability to say that Jesus is Lord unless aided by the Holy Spirit, since all people can say this; but that no one will be disposed heartily to say it; no one will acknowledge him as their Lord; it can never happen that anyone will confess him as the true Messiah who has not been brought to this state by the agency of the Holy Spirit.

Is the Lord - Is the Messiah; or shall acknowledge him as their Lord.

But by the Holy Ghost - Unless he is influenced by the Holy Spirit. This is a very important verse, not only in regard to the particular subject under consideration in the time of Paul, but also in its practical bearing at present. We may learn from it:

(1) That it is a proof that any man is under the influence of the Holy Spirit who is heartily disposed to honor the name and work of Jesus Christ.

(2) Those forms and modes of religion; those religious opinions and practices, will be most in accordance with the designs of the Spirit of God, which do most to honor the name and work of Jesus Christ.

(3) It is true that no man will ever cherish a proper regard for Jesus Christ, nor love his name and work, unless he is influenced by the Holy Spirit. No man loves the name and work of the Redeemer by following simply the inclinations of his own corrupt heart. In all instances of those who have been brought to a willingness to honor him, it has been by the agency of the Holy Spirit.

(4) If any man, in any way, is disposed to disparage the work of Christ, to speak lightly of his person or his name; or holds doctrines that infringe on the fulness of the truth respecting his divine nature, his purity, his atonement, it is proof that he is not under the influence of the Spirit of God. Just in proportion as he shall disparage that work or name, just in that proportion does he give evidence that he is not influenced by the Divine Spirit; but by proud reason, or by imagination, or by a heart that is not reconciled to God.

(5) All true religion is the production of the Holy Spirit. For religion consists essentially in a willingness to honor, and love, and serve the Lord Jesus Christ; and where that exists, it is produced by the Holy Spirit.

(6) The influence of the Holy Spirit should be cherished. To grieve away that Spirit is to drive all proper knowledge of the Redeemer from the soul; to do this is to leave the heart to coldness, and darkness, and barrenness, and spiritual death.

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

No man, speaking by the Spirit of God, &c. He tells them, if they see a person moved in an extraordinary manner, and say anathema, curse, or speak ill of Jesus, such an one cannot be moved by a good spirit. And no man can say, the Lord Jesus, that is, praise Christ as he ought, but by a good spirit. (Witham)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

The apostle proveth that they had received their spiritual gifts from the Spirit of God, because when they had not received this Spirit, they blasphemed the Christian religion, and called Christ

accursed, which could not be done by any that spake

by the Spirit of God; for there being but one God, and the Holy Spirit being one of the three persons in the Divine Being, and Jesus Christ another, and the eternal Son of God, it could not be but he that called Christ accursed, as the Jews and the heathens did, must blaspheme God, which none could do by the influence of that Holy Spirit, who was one of the persons in the blessed Trinity: and as by this the apostle lets them know, that they were now acted by another spirit than they were in their Gentile state; so he also lets them know, that those heathens, amongst whom they lived, were not acted by the Spirit of God, but by the evil spirit. On the other side, he saith, that

no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. There is a double saying that Jesus is the Lord:

1. When men only say it with their lips, but do not believe it in their hearts, are not affected with what they say, nor do pay that homage of faith and obedience to him, which should correspond with such a profession: thus men say Christ is the Lord, who preach him or discourse of him as men, though they do not in heart believe in him, receive or embrace him, or live up to the holy rules of life which he hath given; thus Judas, Caiaphas, and others, said Christ was the Lord; this they could not do but by the Holy Ghost, that is, the gifts of the Holy Ghost, which are common, which those might have who were never renewed by the Holy Ghost. So these Corinthians generally going thus far verbally to acknowledge Christ the Lord, it was an argument they had thus far been influenced by the Holy Ghost.

2. There is a serious and saving saying that Jesus is the Lord, when men do not only with their lips speak these words, and other words to the same sense, but heartily acknowledge him, believe in him, love him, obey him, and call upon him, professing him as they ought to do, and so as may be of advantage to them to life and salvation. No man now doth this but by the Holy Ghost renewing and sanctifying him, and blessing him with and helping him in the exercise of such habits. We shall observe in holy writ, that some verbs signify not the action only, but the action with its due quality: thus, hearing sometimes signifieth to hear so, as withal to believe. Calling upon the name of the Lord, Rom 10:13, signifieth a calling aright. Confessing, 1Jo 4:15, signifies a confessing with faith and love. So the verb say in this text may signify such a saying or speaking, as is attended with faith, love, and due obedience.

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

3. Jesus accursed—The pagans who blasphemed Christ, and the persecuting emperors who required Christians to blaspheme Christ, were under dumb idols, adverse to the one Spirit.

Say—From the heart and in truth.

Holy Ghost—Unless the Holy Spirit give the power, Christ can neither be truly received nor savingly confessed.

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

Wherefore. Their previous condition of Gentile ignorance rendered it necessary to instruct them fully respecting the nature and discrimination of the charisms of the Spirit. By the Spirit of God; rather, in the Spirit; i.e. in the state of spiritual exaltation and ecstasy. The phrase is a Hebrew one to describe inspiration. Jesus accursed. It may well seem amazing that the Corinthians should need instructing that such awful language could not be uttered by any one speaking "in the Spirit of God." It is evident, however, that such expressions had been uttered by persons who were, or seemed to be, carried away by the impassioned impulse which led to "glossolaly." (It is better to use this technical word in order to dissipate the cloud of strange misconceptions as to the true nature of this charism. ) So terrible an outrage on the conscience of Christians could never have passed unchecked and unpunished, except from the obvious inability of the young community to grapple with the new and perplexing phenomena of an "inspiration" which appeared to destroy the personal control of those possessed by it. Among Jewish converts glossolaly was regarded as a form of that wild mantle "inspiration" of which we find some traces in Jewish history, (1Sa_10:10, 11 18:10 19:23, 24, etc.) and which was alluded to in the very name Nabo, which implied a boiling energy. Among Gentile converts the glossolaly would be classed with the overmastering influences of which they read, or which they witnessed, in the Sibyls, the Pythian priestesses, and the wild orgiastic devotees of Eastern cults. They would not like to call any one to task for things spoken in a condition which they regarded as wholly supernatural. As to the speakers,

(1) some of them, not being sincere, might have really fallen under the influence of impulses which were earthly and demonish, not Divine;

(2) others, not duly controlling their own genuine impulse, may have been liable to the uncontrolled sway of utterances for which they were at the moment irresponsible;

(3) or again, being incapable of reasoned expression, they may have audibly expressed vague Gnostic doubts as to the identity of the "Jesus" who was crucified and the Divine Word; or

(4) they may have been entangled in Jewish perplexities rising from Deu_21:23, "He that is hanged" (which was also the expression applied by Jews to the crucified) "is accursed of God;" or finally,

(5) by some strange abuse of the true principle expressed by St. Paul in 2Co_5:16, they may have asserted in this fearful form their emancipation from the acknowledgment of Jesus "after the flesh." Similar phenomena the same intrusions into worship of downright blasphemy or of blasphemous familiarity have constantly recurred at times of overwhelming spiritual excitement, as for instance m the adherents of the "everlasting gospel" in the thirteenth century, and in various movements of our own day. Is accursed; rather, is anathema. The word corresponds to the Hebrew cherem, which means "a ban," and "what is devoted or set apart by a ban;" and to the Latin sacer, which means not only "sacred," set apart by holy consecration, but also "devoted to destruction." No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by in the Holy Ghost. It involved a strong rebuke to the illuminati, who professed a profound spiritual insight, to tell them that no man could make the simple, humble confession of the divinity of Jesus (for "Lord" is here an equivalent of the Hebrew "Jehovah") except by the same inspiration as that which they so terribly abused. There is a very similar passage in 1Jn_1:2; but there the "test" of the inspiration is a confession of the humanity of Jesus as against Gnostics, who treated his human life as purely phantasmal. Here the test is the confession of his divinity as against Jews and Gentiles. (For a parallel passage, (see Mat_16:17, "Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee.

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

Therefore - Since the heathen idols cannot speak themselves, much less give spiritual gifts to others, these must necessarily be among Christians only. As no one speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed - That is, as none who does this, (which all the Jews and heathens did,) speaketh by the Spirit of God - Is actuated by that Spirit, so as to speak with tongues, heal diseases, or cast out devils. So no one can say, Jesus is the Lord - None can receive him as such; for, in the scripture language, to say, or to believe, implies an experimental assurance. But by the Holy Ghost - The sum is, None have the Holy Spirit but Christians: all Christians have this Spirit.

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

The great difference that was then in the world, was about Jesus. Those that were led away by dumb idols, were taught by Satan to blaspheme, and say, upon the mention of our Saviour’s name, Jesus anathema, Jesus anathema; that is, let Jesus be anathema, accursed, detested and destroyed, as the common odium of their gods.

Now when the apostle says, such speak not by the Spirit of God, his meaning is, that they did it by the impulse and instinct of the devil, by the actings and instigation of the evil spirit, which ruled in those children of disobedience: on the other side, every one that believeth calleth Jesus Lord, and professeth faith in him.

Now none says the apostle, can do this but by the Holy Ghost, that is, by his help and assistance. But it may be said, we read in scripture of many who were actuated by the unclean spirit, that yet called Jesus Lord, Mar 1:23; Act 16:17.

Ans. 1. These acknowledgments of Christ to be Lord, were either wrested from the devil, and were a considerable part of his torment, or were overruled by God to advance the glory of Christ.

But, 2. The apostle here speaks of such a calling Jesus Lord, as was accompanied with faith in him, and subjection to him. There is a double saying that Jesus is Lord; the one verbal, Ore tenus, with lip and tongue only, without the consent of the heart, or obedience of the life; the other actual, when we do with our whole souls own and acknowledge him, love and embrace him, obey and serve him, as Lord, and vote for his government and dominion over us. No man thus calleth Jesus Lord, but by the Holy Ghost renewing and sanctifying him, assisting and enabling him so to do.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3. “Therefore I make known unto you that no one speaking in the Spirit of God can say Jesus is anathema, and no one is able to say Jesus is Lord but by the Holy Ghost.” This is conclusive from the fact that the Holy Ghost is the Successor and Revelator of Christ. “Lord” is applied to a man that rules, hence means the humanity of Christ, the legitimate ruler of the world, as God originally gave it to man. Though the devil has usurped it from Adam the first, Adam the Second has conquered Satan and taken it back. Hence He is destined to be “Lord over all, blessed for evermore.” This lordship must begin in the human heart, in which the Holy Ghost enthrones Jesus in sanctification. Since He is sent into the world to reveal Jesus and enthrone Him in the heart, whenever He sanctifies a soul He reveals Jesus sitting on the throne of the heart. The regenerated man knows Jesus as Savior because He has saved him, but does not know Him as Lord, i. e., Ruler, until He is enthroned in the heart in sanctification. Hence the fearful Unitarian trend of the popular churches. Without the baptism of the Holy Ghost, the churches not only become despiritualized into dead formality, but Unitarianized into deistic infidelity. This arises from the fact that Christ must be crowned within be fore you can say, “Jesus is Lord.” It is the prerogative of the Holy Ghost to reveal and crown Jesus on the throne of the heart, which he always does in sanctification. Jesus sends the Holy Ghost, and He reveals Jesus. When you receive the personal Holy Ghost in sanctification, he reveals Jesus sitting on the throne of your heart. Then can you say, “Jesus is Lord.”

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Wherefore I make known unto you, that no man speaking in the Spirit of God saith, Jesus is anathema [devoted to destruction, hence accursed]; and no man can say, Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy Spirit . [The previous idolatrous life of the Corinthians left them not only ignorant as to the ways of God's Spirit, but also tended to mislead them. Paul therefore begins their instruction with the elementary principles which concern inspiration and revelation; thus: 1. An idol reveals no truth; it is dumb. 2. Idols are many, but God is one. 3. The pretended revelations and oracles of idols or idol priests and other impostors, may be tested by what their authors say of Jesus, for they will speak evil of him. 4. The true prophets and revealers may also be so tested. They will assert the claims of Jesus, which no man is moved to do save by the Holy Spirit ( 1Jo_4:2-3 ; 1Jo_2:22 ; 1Jo_5:1 ). Treating these four points in their order, we need to note that: 1. Dumb idols were often made to speak by priests concealed in or behind them, who made use of speaking-tubes which led to the parted lips of the idol. Hence, converts from paganism needed to be reminded that idols were indeed dumb, as a safeguard against such fraud. No spiritual truth came from the oracles of idols. 2. As each realm of nature had its god, idolaters were drawn about from shrine to shrine and temple to temple, seeking one blessing from one god to-day, and another blessing from another god to-morrow. Hence, saturated as they were with polytheism, diverse gifts were with them instinctively associated with diverse gods. But the diverse gifts of Christianity were not to be attributed to different deities, or even to different subordinate spiritual beings, such as angels, etc., for they were all from one God, as Paul affirms in this chapter, reasserting it ten times in the next ten verses by way of emphasis. 3. Elymas affords a picture of one pretending to speak oracles--a false prophet. 4. The conflict between Paul and Elymas shows the blasphemy of the false and the confession of the true prophet ( Act_13:6-12 ). The oracle of Delphi was near by, and contentions between idolatry and Christianity were, we may be sure, matters of daily occurrence in Corinth, and the ideas of new converts would be easily confused. The third verse shows that the test of a teacher is not his apostolic succession, but the soundness of his doctrine--comp. Gal_1:8 ]

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.

3. No man speaking by the spirit of God, etc. How should they test those professing to speak by the divine Spirit? If a heathen priest professed to speak by the spirit and called Jesus accursed, he had not the Spirit of God. In times of persecution Christians were asked to say Jesus Anathema. If one speaking by the spirit pronounced Jesus the Lord, he had the Holy Spirit. This confession from the heart is always moved by the Spirit.

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.

3. Ἰησοῦς twice אABC Vulg. Peshito. Ἰησοῦν rec. with DEG Vetus Lat. F has Ἰησοῦ in the first place and Ἰησοῦν in the second.

3. διὸ γνωρίζω ὑμῖν. Because in your unconverted state you were liable to such delusions, it is my duty to provide you with the means of forming a sound judgment on such matters. The essential principle of all true inspiration is the confession of Jesus as Lord. This inspiration may shew itself in different ways. But the confession of Jesus must underlie all. Cf. an extremely similar passage in 1Jn 4:1-3. This caution was very necessary in the infant Church. In spite of the warnings of St Paul and St John, many were entrapped by the extraordinary and incomprehensible ravings of men like Simon Magus, Menander and the Ophites (or Naassenes, worshippers of the serpent), as we learn from the writings of Irenaeus and Hippolytus. Cf. 1Jn 2:19.

ἐν πνεύματι. In the Spirit; i.e. inspired by Him.

ἀνάθεμα. See note on ch. 1Co 16:22.

κύριος Ἰησοῦς. Jesus is Lord.

ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ. Literally, in the Holy Ghost (or Spirit), see above. Not a Single true word can be spoken but by the agency of the Spirit of God. As far as the confession that Jesus is Lord goes, he who makes it is under the influence of the Holy Ghost. It is remarkable that St Paul has in mind in this passage those who deny the Divinity of Christ; St John, in the similar passage just quoted, the sects, which arose afterwards and denied His Humanity.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3.] The negative and positive criteria of inspiration by the Spirit of God: viz. the rejection, or confession, of Jesus as the Lord.

διό, ‘because ye have been hitherto in ignorance of the matter.’

ἐν πν. θεοῦ—ἐν πν. ἁγ.] The Spirit of God, or the Holy Ghost, is the Power pervading the speaker, the Element in which he speaks. So Schöttgen, on Mat 22:43, quotes from the Rabbis, ‘David saw, ברוח הקדש in the Holy Spirit.’

λαλῶν λέγει] On the difference of meaning between λαλῶ, ‘to discourse,’ ‘to speak,’ and λέγω, ‘to say,’ the former of the act of utterance absolutely, the latter having for its object that which is uttered, see note on Joh 8:25. In all the seeming exceptions to this, λαλῶ may be justified as keeping its own meaning of ‘to discourse:’ we may safely deny that it is ever ‘to say’ simply.

ἀνάθ. Ἰης.] Jesus (not Christ, the Name of office, itself in some measure the object of faith,—but Jesus, the personal Name,—the historical Person whose life was matter of fact: the curse, and the confession, are in this way far deeper) is accursed (see ref. Rom. note). So κύρ. Ἰης., Jesus is Lord (all that is implied in κύριος, being here also implied: and we must not forget that it is the LXX verbum solenne for the Heb. Jehovah). By these last words the influence of the Holy Spirit is widened by the Apostle from the supernatural gifts to which perhaps it had been improperly confined, to the faith and confession of every Christian.

It is remarkable that in 1Jn 4:1, 1Jn 4:2, where a test to try the spirits is given, the human side of this confession is brought out,—Ἰησοῦν χριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθότα,—John having to deal with those who denied the reality of the Incarnation. Or also, as Bengel: “Paulus præbet criterium veri contra gentes: Johannes, contra falsos prophetas.”

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

Calleth Jesus accursed [λεγει αναθεμα ιησους] . Lit., saith Anathema Jesus. Rev., preserving the formula, saith Jesus is Anathema. Compare Act 18:6, and see on offerings, Luk 21:5. Paul uses only the form ajnaqema, and always in the sense of accursed.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.