1 Korintus 1:11

1:11 For members of Chloe’s household have made it clear to me, my brothers and sisters, ¹  that there are quarrels ²  among you.

1 Korintus 1:16

1:16 (I also baptized the household of Stephanus. Otherwise, I do not remember whether I baptized anyone else.)

1 Korintus 16:15

16:15 Now, brothers and sisters, ³  you know about the household of Stephanus, that as the first converts ⁴  of Achaia, they devoted themselves to ministry for the saints. I urge you

1 Korintus 3:17

3:17 If someone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. For God’s temple is holy, which is what you are.

1 Korintus 11:34

11:34 If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that when you assemble it does not lead to judgment. I will give directions about other matters when I come.

1 Korintus 14:35

14:35 If they want to find out about something, they should ask their husbands at home, because it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in church. ⁵ 

1 Korintus 16:19

16:19 The churches in the province of Asia ⁶  send greetings to you. Aquila and Prisca ⁷  greet ⁸  you warmly in the Lord, with the church that meets in their house.

1 Korintus 3:9

3:9 We are coworkers belonging to God. ⁹  You are God’s field, God’s building.

1 Korintus 3:16

3:16 Do you not know that you are God’s temple ¹⁰  and that God’s Spirit lives in you?

1 Korintus 11:22

11:22 Do you not have houses so that you can eat and drink? Or are you trying to show contempt for the church of God by shaming those who have nothing? What should I say to you? Should I praise you? I will not praise you for this!

1 Korintus 9:13

9:13 Don’t you know that those who serve in the temple ¹¹  eat food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar receive a part of the offerings?

1 Korintus 16:2

16:2 On the first day of the week, each of you should set aside some income ¹²  and save ¹³  it to the extent that God has blessed you, ¹⁴  so that a collection will not have to be made ¹⁵  when I come.

1 Korintus 8:10

8:10 For if someone weak sees you who possess knowledge dining in an idol’s temple, will not his conscience be “strengthened” ¹⁶  to eat food offered to idols?

1 Korintus 6:19

6:19 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, ¹⁷  whom you have from God, and you are not your own?

1 Korintus 4:11

4:11 To the present hour we are hungry and thirsty, poorly clothed, brutally treated, and without a roof over our heads.

1 Korintus 3:10

3:10 According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master-builder I laid a foundation, but someone else builds on it. And each one must be careful how he builds.

1 Korintus 9:4

9:4 Do we not have the right to financial support? ¹⁸ 

1 Korintus 3:12

3:12 If anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, ¹⁹ 

1 Korintus 3:15

3:15 If someone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss. ²⁰  He himself will be saved, but only as through fire.

1 Korintus 7:34

7:34 and he is divided. An unmarried woman ²¹  or a virgin ²²  is concerned about the things of the Lord, to be holy both in body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the things of the world, how to please her husband.

[1:11]  ¹ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:10.

[1:11]  ² tn Or “rivalries, disputes.”

[16:15]  ³ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:10.

[16:15]  ⁴ tn Grk “firstfruits.”

[14:35]  ⁵ tc Some scholars have argued that vv. 34-35 should be excised from the text (principally G. D. Fee, First Corinthians [NICNT], 697-710; P. B. Payne, “Fuldensis, Sigla for Variants in Vaticanus, and 1 Cor 14.34-5,” NTS 41 [1995]: 240-262). This is because the Western witnesses (D F G ar b vg^ms Ambst) have these verses after v. 40, while the rest of the tradition retains them here. There are no mss that omit the verses. Why, then, would some scholars wish to excise the verses? Because they believe that this best explains how they could end up in two different locations, that is to say, that the verses got into the text by way of a very early gloss added in the margin. Most scribes put the gloss after v. 33; others, not knowing where they should go, put them at the end of the chapter. Fee points out that “Those who wish to maintain the authenticity of these verses must at least offer an adequate answer as to how this arrangement came into existence if Paul wrote them originally as our vv. 34-35” (First Corinthians [NICNT], 700). In a footnote he adds, “The point is that if it were already in the text after v. 33, there is no reason for a copyist to make such a radical transposition.” Although it is not our intention to interact with proponents of the shorter text in any detail here, a couple of points ought to be made. (1) Since these verses occur in all witnesses to 1 Corinthians, to argue that they are not original means that they must have crept into the text at the earliest stage of transmission. How early? Earlier than when the pericope adulterae (John 7:53-8:11) made its way into the text (late 2nd, early 3rd century?), earlier than the longer ending of Mark (16:9-20) was produced (early 2nd century?), and earlier than even “in Ephesus” was added to Eph 1:1 (upon reception of the letter by the first church to which it came, the church at Ephesus) – because in these other, similar places, the earliest witnesses do not add the words. This text thus stands as remarkable, unique. Indeed, since all the witnesses have the words, the evidence points to them as having been inserted into the original document. Who would have done such a thing? And, further, why would scribes have regarded it as original since it was obviously added in the margin? This leads to our second point. (2) Following a suggestion made by E. E. Ellis (“The Silenced Wives of Corinth (I Cor. 14:34-5),” New Testament Textual Criticism: Its Significance for Exegesis, 213-20 [the suggestion comes at the end of the article, almost as an afterthought]), it is likely that Paul himself added the words in the margin. Since it was so much material to add, Paul could have squelched any suspicions by indicating that the words were his (e.g., by adding his name or some other means [cf. 2 Thess 3:17]). This way no scribe would think that the material was inauthentic. (Incidentally, this is unlike the textual problem at Rom 5:1, for there only one letter was at stake; hence, scribes would easily have thought that the “text” reading was original. And Paul would hardly be expected to add his signature for one letter.) (3) What then is to account for the uniform Western tradition of having the verses at the end of the chapter? Our conjecture (and that is all it is) is that the scribe of the Western Vorlage could no longer read where the verses were to be added (any marginal arrows or other directional device could have been smudged), but, recognizing that this was part of the original text, felt compelled to put it somewhere. The least offensive place would have been at the end of the material on church conduct (end of chapter 14), before the instructions about the resurrection began. Although there were no chapter divisions in the earliest period of copying, scribes could still detect thought breaks (note the usage in the earliest papyri). (4) The very location of the verses in the Western tradition argues strongly that Paul both authored vv. 34-35 and that they were originally part of the margin of the text. Otherwise, one has a difficulty explaining why no scribe seemed to have hinted that these verses might be inauthentic (the scribal sigla of codex B, as noticed by Payne, can be interpreted otherwise than as an indication of inauthenticity [cf. J. E. Miller, “Some Observations on the Text-Critical Function of the Umlauts in Vaticanus, with Special Attention to 1 Corinthians 14.34-35,” JSNT 26 [2003]: 217-36.). There are apparently no mss that have an asterisk or obelisk in the margin. Yet in other places in the NT where scribes doubted the authenticity of the clauses before them, they often noted their protest with an asterisk or obelisk. We are thus compelled to regard the words as original, and as belonging where they are in the text above.

[16:19]  ⁶ tn Grk “the churches of Asia”; in the NT “Asia” always refers to the Roman province of Asia, made up of about one-third of the west and southwest end of modern Asia Minor. Asia lay to the west of the region of Phrygia and Galatia. The words “the province of” are supplied to indicate to the modern reader that this does not refer to the continent of Asia.

[16:19]  ⁷ sn On Aquila and Prisca see also Acts 18:2, 18, 26; Rom 16:3-4; 2 Tim 4:19. In the NT “Priscilla” and “Prisca” are the same person. The author of Acts uses the full name Priscilla, while Paul uses the diminutive form Prisca.

[16:19]  ⁸ tc The plural form of this verb, ἀσπάζονται (aspazontai, “[they] greet”), is found in several good mss (B F G 075 0121 0243 33 1739 1881) as well as the Byzantine cursives. But the singular is read by an equally impressive group (א C D K P Ψ 104 2464 pc). This part of the verse is lacking in codex A. Deciding on the basis of external evidence is quite difficult. Internally, however, the singular appears to have given rise to the plural: (1) The rest of the greetings in this verse are in the plural; this one was probably made plural by some scribes for purposes of assimilation; and, more significantly, (2) since both Aquila and Prisca are mentioned as the ones who send the greeting, the plural is more natural. The singular is, of course, not impossible Greek; indeed, a singular verb with a compound subject is used with some frequency in the NT (cf. Matt 13:55; Mark 8:27; 14:1; John 2:2; 3:22; 4:36, 53; Acts 5:29; 16:31; 1 Tim 6:4). This is especially common when “Jesus and his disciples” is the subject. What is significant is that when such a construction is found the emphasis is placed on the first-named person (in this case, Aquila). Normally when these two are mentioned in the NT, Priscilla is mentioned first (Acts 18:18, 26; Rom 16:3; 2 Tim 4:19). Only here and in Acts 18:2 (the first mention of them) is Aquila mentioned before Priscilla. Many suggest that Priscilla is listed first due to prominence. Though that is possible, both the mention of Aquila first here and the singular verb give him special prominence (cf. ExSyn 401-2). What such prominence means in each instance is difficult to assess. Nevertheless, here is a Pauline instance in which Aquila is given prominence. Too much can be made of the word order argument in either direction.

[3:9]  ⁹ tn Although 1 Cor 3:9 is frequently understood to mean, “we are coworkers with God,” such a view assumes that the genitive θεοῦ (qeou) is associative because of its relationship to συνεργοί (sunergoi). However, not only is a genitive of association not required by the syntax (cf. ExSyn 130), but the context is decidedly against it: Paul and Apollos are insignificant compared to the God whom they serve (vv. 5-8).

[3:16]  ¹⁰ sn You are God’s temple refers here to the church, since the pronoun you is plural in the Greek text. (In 6:19 the same imagery is used in a different context to refer to the individual believer.)

[9:13]  ¹¹ tn Grk “working the sacred things.”

[16:2]  ¹² tn Grk “set aside, storing whatever he has been blessed with.”

[16:2]  ¹³ tn Grk “set aside, storing.” The participle θησαυρίζων (qhsaurizwn) indicates the purpose or result of setting aside the extra income.

[16:2]  ¹⁴ tn “To the extent that God has blessed you” translates an awkward expression, “whatever has been prospered [to you].” This verb has been translated as an active with “God” as subject, taking it as a divine passive.

[16:2]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “so that collections will not be taking place.”

[8:10]  ¹⁶ tn Or “built up”; This is the same word used in v. 1b. It is used ironically here: The weak person is “built up” to commit what he regards as sin.

[6:19]  ¹⁷ 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.

[9:4]  ¹⁸ tn Grk “the right to eat and drink.” In the context this is a figurative reference to financial support.

[3:12]  ¹⁹ sn The various materials described here, both valuable (gold, silver, precious stones) and worthless (wood, hay, or straw) refer to the quality of work built on the foundation, or possibly to the motivation of those doing the building. The materials themselves have been understood (1) as deeds or (2) as people (since ultimately the passage is addressing those who minister to others).

[3:15]  ²⁰ tn The translation “[will] be punished” is given here by BDAG 428 s.v. ζημιόω 2. But the next clause says “he will be delivered” and so “suffering loss” is more likely to refer to the destruction of the “work” by fire or the loss of the reward that could have been gained.

[7:34]  ²¹ sn In context the unmarried woman would probably refer specifically to a widow, who was no longer married, as opposed to the virgin, who had never been married.

[7:34]  ²² tc There are three viable variant readings at this point in the text. (1) The reading ἡ γυνὴ ἡ ἄγαμος καὶ ἡ παρθένος (Jh gunh Jh agamo" kai Jh parqeno", “the unmarried woman and the virgin”) is represented by ancient and important mss, as well as some significant versions (̹⁵ B 104 365 1505 pc vg co). (2) The reading ἡ γυνὴ ἡ ἄγαμος καὶ ἡ παρθένος ἡ ἄγαμος (“the unmarried woman and the unmarried virgin”) is also found in ancient and important mss (Ì⁴⁶ א A 33 1739 1881 pc). (3) The reading ἡ γυνὴ καὶ ἡ παρθένος ἡ ἄγαμος (“the woman and the unmarried virgin”) is found in Western mss (D F G) and the majority of Byzantine cursives. Based upon external evidence, the first and second readings are the strongest; the readings both reach deep into the second century with strong testimony from mss of the Alexandrian texttype. Internal evidence seems equally balanced: Scribes may have wanted to add ἡ ἄγαμος to παρθένος for stylistic reasons, but they might also have wanted to remove it because it sounded redundant. Because Paul’s meaning is not quite clear, a decision on the proper textual reading is difficult. On the whole scribes tended to add to the text, not take from it. Thus the first reading should be favored as original, but this decision should be regarded as less than certain.

[7:34]  tn Grk “The unmarried woman and the virgin.” The identity of the “virgin” here is a matter of interpretation (see note on “people who have never married” in v. 25 for discussion), which has in fact contributed to textual variation at this point in the text (see the text critical note above). As far as the translation is concerned, one must determine if one group of women or two are in view. It is possible that Paul means to refer to only one class of women here, namely unmarried virgins, but the use of the adjective ἡ ἄγαμος (Jh agamo", “unmarried”) with “woman” and not “virgin” precludes that interpretation; in addition, the use of the article with both “woman” and “virgin” implies that two distinct groups are in view. If two groups are in view, English would more naturally use the conjunction “or” to indicate the distinction. Thus the translation “An unmarried woman or a virgin” has been used to make clear that two groups are in view.