came the Word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
Resistance to the Divine order in the Church
I. Proceeds from the overweening opinion a man has of his own enlightenment, or of his superiority to others.
II. Will never be offered by a truly spiritual man. He acknowledges the supreme authority of God’s Word.
III. If persisted in through wilful ignorance, incurs a tremendous responsibility. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
How the gospel came to Britain
This case is cited by Paul to check the arrogance of the Corinthians, and we may very properly apply it to ours. The Word of God came unto us, and did not go out from us.
I. The affecting nature of the memento. That the Word of God should have come unto us at all, demands peculiar gratitude. Scarcely reckoned among the nations, our island seemed flung into the ocean of nature. That we should have been forgotten by the apostles would be no great wonder. We were out of their path. What was such a spot as this when churches were rising in Rome, etc.? It is probable, however, that Britain was visited before the apostle’s death; for in one place he rejoices that the gospel was preached to every creature under heaven. And who can say that the prophetic John heard no notes from Albion in the song of all nations which was presented before the throne? Caesar armed his galleys, and came upon us. But he was only the “breaker up” before a most glorious influence. With nearly the promptitude of Caesar, Christianity “came, it saw, it conquered!” It was, no doubt, brought to us by a missionary given wholly to the work. No marble marks his name; but we cannot help exclaiming, “How beautiful upon the mountains were his feet!” etc.
II. This subject gives rise to some very interesting inquiries.
1. Upon what impressions of our state did these missionaries act? Enough of our country was known to assure them that a monstrous superstition prevailed among us. Some would say, “Why disturb this people? They worship God according to their long established custom; there is a mine of philosophy in their legends; they are harmless and simple, happy and content; they have the means of improvement, if they desire it; thesystem you would introduce is very well for us, but it is net suited to them; besides, they seek not your interference; they might as properly bring their religion to you, as you take yours to them.” But there were men (and all generations shall call them blessed) who took a very different view of the state of our aborigines. However interesting a people we might be, they knew that we were idolaters: that, however the emblems of our worship might be interpreted, the majority looked to the emblems alone, and that the fire, trees, etc., were actually worshipped; that children and captives were crowded into wicker figures and burned; that the priests were vile impostors and jugglers; that the system was a sort of parricide on reason, and nature, and God; that it was the prolific source of all evil, the conjunction of all vices. Therefore they fearlessly launched on the deep to visit us, and we know that their entrance was not in vain.
2. Under what obligations were these missionaries laid? No spirit bade them go forth, nothing doubting. But a weight of responsibility pressed upon them; they had received the gospel; a commission had been given them to preach it to all. They were always ready to obey the Saviour. Some might think their labours should be confined at home; frivolity would simper; friendship would dissuade; prudence would calculate; the whole mind would shrink at the idea of danger. But a feeling of duty was paramount; and what they did, they did heartily, as unto the Lord. But, if they did what it was only their duty to do, how gross is our neglect!
3. By what feelings were these missionaries inspired? Avarice and ambition fed not their flame. It was charity in its pure sublime--a charity which never failed. Their business was not with civilisation and science; but the soul was their grand concern, because they knew its source, its danger, and its destiny.
4. With what means were these missionaries furnished? It is not very probable that they were furnished with miraculous powers. They had no red-cross banners, no pealing litany, etc.; but by them the Word of God came to us.
5. To what sufferings were these missionaries exposed? They must have had a variety of perils to encounter. From the necks of endeared friends they were torn asunder. How did the druid scowl at them and the multitude clamour for them as a sacrifice! Probably some came to a violent death. (R. W. Hamilton, D. D.)
The reason for missions
The text reminds us--
I. Of our obligations.
1. Missionaries came first to us.
2. Consider their impressions, obligations, motives, means, sufferings.
II. Of our duty.
1. To send the gospel to others, who have equal need, equal claims.
2. We have the ability to do it.
3. Are under equal obligation.
4. Possess the same motives. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.--
St. Paul’s authority
History repeats itself. Modern heresies are only ancient errors. It is the fashion now, as it was at Corinth, to repudiate the apostle’s authority and to claim the right to criticise his teaching. The cry then was, Not Paul, but Peter or Apollos; now it is not Paul, but Christ. Consider St. Paul’s authority--
I. In itself.
1. Its nature. Nothing can be plainer than that the words, “The things I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord,” are a claim to Divine authority. His critics must therefore choose one of three theories.
(1) Imposture. But chap. 13. is sufficient to refute that.
(2) Madness. But this Epistle could not have been written by any other than a sane man--a man whose mind was as clear as his purpose was honest.
(3) Truth. No honest or intelligent man could have preferred the claim of our text had it not been true. If true, then St. Paul’s words carry the same weight as the Ten Commandments or the Sermon on the Mount.
2. Its basis. He wrote the commandments of the Lord--i.e., those which came from the Lord by direct inspiration, for they are not quotations from previous revelations.
(1)Joh_14:25-26; Joh_15:12-13 are a declaration at once of the incompleteness of Christ’s personal teaching and a promise of fuller instruction under the ministry of the Holy Spirit. The apostles were to know more than Christ had taught them after He had gone. To compare, therefore, the apostle’s teaching with that of our Lord’s to the disparagement of the former is simply to repudiate the authority of Christ. Jesus only began to teach personally (Act_1:1). His perfected teaching was through the apostles after Pentacost.
(2) Was Paul among the number? This Epistle is a triumphant answer to that question (cf. 1Co_15:1-3 with Gal_1:1; Gal_1:11-16)
. Again, this is blasphemy, insanity, or truth. If the last, then St. Paul’s teaching by the terms of his Master’s declaration was on a level with his own.
3. Its independence (verse 38). The apostle felt that any denial of his claim was based upon wilful and invincible ignorance, and with that he would have no further controversy. And this scathing satire loses none of its severity in its modern application. We have no fear that St. Paul’s authority, with all the precious teaching which rests upon it, will be shaken. What has been finely said of Christianity as a whole may be said of it: “This anvil has been well beaten, but it has worn out many hammers.”
II. As a test.
1. Of fitness to teach. “If any man think himself a prophet,” etc. There was no arrogance in this. St. Paul knew that he had been put in trust with the gospel, and that he had faithfully transmitted the sacred deposit. To repudiate his authority, therefore, was to claim the liberty to tamper with Divine revelation and to imperil the souls of men. Many who thought themselves prophets did this with the disastrous results recorded in this Epistle. No man is fit to play the role of prophet who is not prepared to declare all the counsel of God. But this he cannot do if he shuns to declare any of the commandments of the Lord as delivered by Paul.
2. Of spirituality. “If any man think himself to be spiritual” (cf. 1Co_3:1-2)
. No small amount of the carnal-mindedness of the Corinthians is due to their repudiation of Paul’s teaching. Puffed up with vanity and conceit they rejected “the commandments of the Lord” and became a law unto themselves. Hence their divisions, contentions, laxity, error. The same test may be applied with unerring accuracy in this and every age. The spiritually minded, with rare exceptions, have been those who have “acknowledged that the things which Paul wrote are the commandments of the Lord.” (J. W. Burn.)
But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
Abandonment to ignorance
Paul humbled himself, but magnified his office. Personally he was less than the least of all saints; officially he was not behind the chiefest apostles. But there were those in Corinth who acknowledged neither his authority nor that of any but themselves, and so the apostle knew that his judgment would not go unchallenged.
I. Opinionatedness and ignorance often go together. A little experience convinces us that those who cling the most tenaciously to their own opinions and habits are not men of the soundest judgment. To resist evidence and authority is no sign of intellectual power. Some are obstinate because blind to all but what is acceptable to their own prejudices.
II. There are those whom no evidence can convince and no authority overawe. If all men were candid and followed the light of reason, human life and society would be different. “Men love darkness rather than light,” etc. Young and sanguine ministers often begin with the persuasion that they have only to place the truth fairly before men in order to their conviction and conversion; but experience soon shows that there is a moral obduracy which is proof against all efforts.
III. It may be wise to abandon to their loved ignorance those who will not be enlightened. A benevolent mind will be slow toadopt this course, and never without the hope and prayer that God will use some other methods. But even He seems to act upon this principle, at all events, for a season and purpose. “Ephraim is joined to his idols: let him alone.”
IV. There is better employment for Christian labourers than the endeavours to enlighten the invincibly ignorant. There are the young, the candid, the earnest and prayerful, all anxious for light. Here, then, is abundant scope for effort. Why spend time in tilling the rock when there is virgin soil?
V. There is a probation and a judgment of God to which such characters must needs be left. The Christian labourer must remember that he is not the governor of the world. This reflection will not harden his heart against the unbelieving; he will leave such in the hands of the All-Wise and the All-Merciful. (Prof. J. R. Thomson.)
