I.                   Introduction

A Father had a family of sons who were perpetually quarreling among themselves. When he failed to heal their disputes by his exhortations, he determined to give them a practical illustration of the evils of disunion; and for this purpose he one day told them to bring him a bundle of sticks. When they had done so, he placed the bundle into the hands of each of them in succession, and ordered them to break it in pieces. They tried with all their strength, and were not able to do it.

He next opened the bundle, took the sticks separately, one by one, and again put them into his sons’ hands, upon which they broke them easily. He then addressed them in these words: “My sons, if you are of one mind, and unite to assist each other, you will be as this bundle, uninjured by all the attempts of your enemies; but if you are divided among yourselves, you will be broken as easily as these sticks.” (from Aesop’s Fables)

This is so true in Christendom today.  So often we let little things divide us, things that could be considered “non-essential” doctrines.  Ultimately what that does is weakens the church.  We are much stronger when we are united. 

Having said that I think that denominations are necessary.  One of the ways we stay united is by joining other like minded people on Sunday’s for worship but realizing that many of us are striving for the same “end” (i.e. salvation through Jesus Christ for lost sinners) but with different “means.”

II.                Their Basis for Division (1:10-12)

1 Corinthians 1:10-12 [But] I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.  (11)  For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers.  (12)  What I mean is that each one of you says, "I follow Paul," or "I follow Apollos," or "I follow Cephas," or "I follow Christ."

Let’s take just a quick second to remember what we talked about last week. Paul uniquely points out the strengths of the Corinthians; the fact that they are part of God’s church, they are saints, they are sanctified by Christ, and that the church will be sustained by God until the end.  I could have saved a lot of time if I had preached it that short last week! 

Now Paul is going to start addressing the issues that are plaguing the Corinthian church. Right after praising them and reminding them of their value and place “in Christ” he fires out with a “but…”  The “but” isn’t in a lot of modern translations, but it is in the original language.  So just imagine sitting there in the Corinthian church one Sunday morning when the pastor, or elder, makes his way up front with a letter from the Apostle Paul and he reads all about their “in Christ-ness” and all that wonderful stuff from last weeks message (vv. 1-9).  They would understandably be feeling pretty good about themselves!  Then comes the “but!”  Their hearts must have sank! 

              Divisions:

Paul now states the first problem that he wants to address…divisions!  It is interesting that the same problem that plagues the Corinthian church is the one that plagues the modern church.  Same problems, different culture.

Specifically their problem was with teachers.  Some were of Paul, some of Apollos, some were of Cephas (Peter) and some of Christ.  Many scholars have attempted to outline the differences in the teachings of the four camps, but that’s basically an impossible task.  It’s impossible because Paul does not address those differences here and because we do not know all that much about Apollos, in particular.  However, we do know that there is not recorded dispute between Paul and Apollos.  So, the point here does not seem to be what these four camps were divided over, but simply the fact that they were divided period. 

God is not pleased with division in His church!  Remember we established last week that Paul is going to spend the rest of the book laying out what God wants His church to look like; and the first issue that he is going to tackle is the issue of divisions.

Paul and Apollos both pastored in Corinth for some time; it is quite likely that a group of Jews were saved under Peter’s ministry, perhaps on the day of Pentecost, and each group aligned themselves with their favorite pastor.  The Christ Party was probably the most pious of the groups and were probably so frustrated with the human alignments that they decided that they were simply going to follow Christ. 

While Christ is a good example to follow, even Christ wouldn’t have us do that to the exclusion of the other parties. We are all children of God.  We should all be aligned.  We must fight the urge to be offended when/if people leave our church for another church.  We are all children of God.  We must fight the urge to be tempted to leave a church because of personality conflicts or music genre or preaching style.  We are all children of God. 

I appreciate and cherish your love and your loyalty to this congregation; but please do not be judgmental of people who do not come to this church or who have chosen to leave this church for another fellowship.  We are all children of God.  I really do not desire to have people follow me because I am likable, personable, funny, engaging, relevant, whatever.  I want people to follow Christ.  Christ may very well use me to lead you to Him and to His will, but the focus is on Christ, not me.  We’re going to notice that Paul even calls the attention away from himself and onto Christ.  This is not a plea for the Corinthians to follow Paul.

III.             Paul’s Response To the Division (1:13-17)

1 Corinthians 1:13-17  Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?  (14)  I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius,  (15)  so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name.  (16)  (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.)  (17)  For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

Paul’s opening plea is interesting. He appeals to Christ’s unity with His church.  The literal question is “Is Christ apportioned among you?” meaning do each of you have a little bit of Christ?  The answer is you either have all of Christ or you have none of Christ.  You can’t have any more or any less of Christ.  It’s all or nothing.  Christ is united with His church, and Paul is calling the church to be united, as well.

His next question is where he begins to draw the attention away from himself and begin to build the point of the ridiculousness of their desires to be aligned with a human.  Paul points out that it was not him (nor Apollos or Cephas, for that matter) that was crucified for them.  Paul, Cephas, or Apollos being crucified would have accomplished nothing in the sense of allowing the Corinthians to have a reconciled relationship with their Creator.  Paul’s reasoning is so simple.  Be united in the One who unites you with God.  The crucifixion is what bridges the gap and unites us with the Father.

Paul’s next appeal seems to give us a little insight into what the Corinthians were basing their allegiance on.  The fact that he addresses baptism could provide some evidence that their allegiance was based on the person who baptized them.  But again, his response is simple.  Were you baptized in the name of Paul?  Notice also that he doesn’t use the others names.  He doesn’t say, “was Apollos crucified for you?” or “were you baptized in the name of Cephas?” Rather, he keeps the focus on himself.  And he states that he is thankful that he didn’t baptize anyone, seemingly believing it was providential so that they cannot claim they were baptized in the name of Paul.

This is a common issue, even today, not only with people but with location. I have met a number of people who as I would start conversations with them base their faith on the fact that they were baptized by Francis Chan, John MacArthur, or some other famous preacher.  Also, I can’t even tell you how many people I used to run into in Long Beach who claim to have been baptized in the Jordan!  The problem with all of these scenarios is the people are placing their faith in the person or the location.  IT DOESN’T MATTER!  Baptism is a symbol.  Baptism doesn’t save you, if it did Paul certainly would have baptized more than just Crispus and Gaius. 

This next phrase is absolute astonishing to me.  Paul claims that Christ did not send him to baptize.  When Jesus left this world and he gave what we call the Great Commission, He commanded his followers to baptize.  Yet, Paul says that Christ did not send him to baptize.  What do we do with this statement?

First and foremost I think it is important to keep in mind the context of the letter.  I don’t believe Paul is saying that Christ has told him to not to ever baptize.  Paul is saying that Christ did not send him to Corinth to baptize, He sent Paul there to preach.

Second, it is in the providence of God that Paul was kept from baptizing too many Corinthians.  In that time and culture, a person’s name meant more than it does now.  So that fact that Paul includes the phrase “in the name of Paul” and, “in my name” shows that they would have placed much weight on the fact that Paul had baptized them.

His thankfulness, therefore, is not that they aren’t baptized (because he doesn’t say they never got baptized, in fact, he is implying that they are baptized, just not by him) but that he gave the Corinthians no excuse to think that he had done or said anything to cause his converts to align themselves to him personally.  He had pointed people to Christ. 

While Paul downplays the significance of baptism in his own ministry, it is important to notice that he places it as a key to unity within the body.  He takes each Corinthians Christian (and each reader of this letter, thereafter) back to the foundational act of their faith, the sacrament that publically proclaims their alignment with Christ, and rams home the point that it was no empty ceremony. It is into the name of Christ that they were baptized and they now belong to Him, not to Paul, Apollos, or Cephas.

I could probably preach on Paul’s last statement for a long time!  Paul emphasizes that he was sent to preach the Gospel plainly, not with eloquent wisdom.  His reasoning is fascinating, “lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.”  Again, we must remember that this is a situational calling.  Paul was not sent to preach eloquently to the Corinthians because the Corinthians valued eloquent speech and worldly wisdom (cf. vs. 5).  So he was called to preach plainly so that the glory would go to God and not to the eloquence and wisdom of Paul. 

At the risk of speculation, this is probably why the Apollos party linked themselves with him.  Apollos is historically called the “golden mouthed” or “golden tongued” because of his giftedness to speak eloquently.  However, this should not be looked at as a dig against Apollos, for it was Paul who sent Apollos to minister in Corinth, but a dig against the people that chose to align themselves with a man rather than with Christ.

A case can be made that Paul always purposed to preach simply.  However, if you read some of his letters, like Romans and Galatians, you see a certain eloquence and intellect.  I find it interesting to note that Paul’s decision to preach with simplicity is on one hand Christ’s call for him (vs. 17) and yet on the other hand his own personal decision (2:2).  This tells us that Paul was not an uneducated man, in fact, his training as a Pharisee would prove exactly the opposite.  He was a very well educated man who chose to know nothing but Christ and Him crucified.

Paul believed that preaching with eloquence and wisdom would empty the cross of its power.  This is the problem with trying to be clever in the way that you present the gospel.  We run the risk of aligning people with the wrong thing.  We align them with intellect, social causes, moral or ethical issues and lead them to believe that they are saved.  This is dangerous and potentially empties the cross of its power!

IV.            Conclusion

It is important to note that Paul is not condemning any of the preachers for the people who have aligned themselves to them.  Paul does not say, “Cephas, you evil man, why are you attracting people to follow you?”  He does not say, “Apollos, you fool, why were you so eloquent?  You wanted people to follow you and not Christ!”  Paul’s angst is with the Corinthians, not with Cephas or Apollos.