1 Korintus 6:16

6:16 Or do you not know that anyone who is united with ¹  a prostitute is one body with her? ²  For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.” ³ 

1 Korintus 6:18-19

6:18 Flee sexual immorality! “Every sin a person commits is outside of the body” ⁴  – but the immoral person sins against his own body. 6:19 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, ⁵  whom you have from God, and you are not your own?

1 Korintus 11:24

11:24 and after he had given thanks he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”

1 Korintus 12:13

12:13 For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body. Whether Jews or Greeks or slaves ⁶  or free, we were all made to drink of the one Spirit.

1 Korintus 12:24

12:24 but our presentable members do not need this. Instead, God has blended together the body, giving greater honor to the lesser member,

1 Korintus 13:3

13:3 If I give away everything I own, and if I give over my body in order to boast, ⁷  but do not have love, I receive no benefit.

1 Korintus 15:37

15:37 And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare seed ⁸  – perhaps of wheat or something else.

[6:16]  ¹ tn Or “is in relationship with.”

[6:16]  ² tn Grk “is one body,” implying the association “with her.”

[6:16]  ³ sn A quotation from Gen 2:24.

[6:18]  ⁴ sn It is debated whether this is a Corinthian slogan. If it is not, then Paul is essentially arguing that there are two types of sin, nonsexual sins which take place outside the body and sexual sins which are against a person’s very own body. If it is a Corinthian slogan, then it is a slogan used by the Corinthians to justify their immoral behavior. With it they are claiming that anything done in the body or through the body had no moral relevance. A decision here is very difficult, but the latter is to be preferred for two main reasons. (1) This is the most natural understanding of the statement as it is written. To construe it as a statement by Paul requires a substantial clarification in the sense (e.g., “All other sins…” [NIV]). (2) Theologically the former is more difficult: Why would Paul single out sexual sins as more intrinsically related to the body than other sins, such as gluttony or drunkenness? For these reasons, it is more likely that the phrase in quotation marks is indeed a Corinthian slogan which Paul turns against them in the course of his argument, although the decision must be regarded as tentative.

[6:19]  ⁵ tn Grk “the ‘in you’ Holy Spirit.” The position of the prepositional phrase ἐν ὑμῖν (en Jumin, “in you”) between the article and the adjective effectively places the prepositional phrase in first attributive position. Such constructions are generally translated into English as relative clauses.

[12:13]  ⁶ tn See the note on the word “slave” in 7:21.

[13:3]  ⁷ tc The reading καυχήσωμαι (kauchswmai, “I might boast”) is well supported by Ì⁴⁶ א A B 048 33 1739* pc co Hier^mss. The competing reading, καυθήσομαι (kauqhsomai, “I will burn”), is found in C D F G L 81 1175 1881* al latt and a host of patristic writers. From this reading other variants were obviously derived: καυθήσωμαι (kauqhswmai), a future subjunctive (“I might burn”) read by the Byzantine text and a few others (Ψ 1739^c 1881^c Ï); and καυθῇ (kauqh, “it might be burned”) read by 1505 pc. On an external level, the Alexandrian reading is obviously superior, though the Western and Byzantine readings need to be accounted for. (The following discussion is derived largely from TCGNT 497-98). Internally, καυχήσωμαι is superior for the following reasons: (1) Once the Church started suffering persecution and martyrdom by fire, the v.l. naturally arose. Once there, it is difficult to see why any scribe would intentionally change it to καυχήσωμαι. (2) Involving as it does the change of just two letters (χ to θ [c to q], ω to ο [w to o]), this reading could be accomplished without much fanfare. Yet, it appears cumbersome in the context, both because of the passive voice and especially the retention of the first person (“If I give up my body that I may be burned”). A more logical word would have been the third person passive, καυθῇ, as read in 1505 (“If I give up my body that it may be burned”). (3) Although the connection between giving up one’s body and boasting is ambiguous, this very ambiguity has all the earmarks of being from Paul. It may have the force of giving up one’s body into slavery. In any event, it looks to be the harder reading. Incidentally, the Byzantine reading is impossible because the future subjunctive did not occur in Koine Greek. As the reading of the majority of Byzantine minuscules, its roots are clearly post-Koine and as such is a “grammatical monstrosity that cannot be attributed to Paul” (TCGNT 498). Cf. also the notes in BDF §28; MHT 2:219.

[15:37]  ⁸ tn Grk “and what you sow, you do not sow the body that will be, but a bare seed.”