1 Korintus 3:8

3:8 The one who plants and the one who waters work as one, ¹  but each will receive his reward according to his work.

1 Korintus 6:4

6:4 So if you have ordinary lawsuits, do you appoint as judges those who have no standing in the church? ² 

1 Korintus 8:9

8:9 But be careful that this liberty of yours does not become a hindrance to the weak.

1 Korintus 10:19

10:19 Am I saying that idols or food sacrificed to them amount to anything?

1 Korintus 10:24

10:24 Do not seek your own good, but the good of the other person.

1 Korintus 12:29

12:29 Not all are apostles, are they? Not all are prophets, are they? Not all are teachers, are they? Not all perform miracles, do they?

1 Korintus 14:14

14:14 If ³  I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unproductive.

1 Korintus 15:49

15:49 And just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, let us also bear ⁴  the image of the man of heaven.

[3:8]  ¹ tn Grk “are one.” The purpose of this phrase is to portray unified action on the part of ministers underneath God’s sovereign control. Although they are in fact individuals, they are used by God with a single purpose to accomplish his will in facilitating growth. This emphasis is brought out in the translation “work as one.”

[6:4]  ² tn Or “if you have ordinary lawsuits, appoint as judges those who have no standing in the church!” This alternative reading (cf. KJV, NIV) takes the Greek verb καθίζετε (kaqizete) as an ironic imperative instead of a question. This verb comes, however, at the end of the sentence. It is not impossible that Paul meant for it to be understood this way, but its placement in the sentence does not make this probable.

[14:14]  ³ tc ‡ Most witnesses, including some important ones (א A D^s Ψ 048 Ï lat sy bo), have γάρ (gar, “for”) here, while an equally impressive array of witnesses lack the conjunction (Ì⁴⁶ B F G 0243 1739 1881 sa). This conjunction was frequently added by scribes in epistolary literature as a clarifying word, making the connection with the preceding more explicit. As such, it has the earmarks of being a motivated reading and thus should be rejected. NA²⁷ places the word in brackets, indicating doubts as to its authenticity.

[15:49]  ⁴ tc ‡ A few significant witnesses have the future indicative φορέσομεν (foresomen, “we will bear”; B I 6 630 1881 al sa) instead of the aorist subjunctive φορέσωμεν (foreswmen, “let us bear”; Ì⁴⁶ א A C D F G Ψ 075 0243 33 1739 Ï latt bo). If the original reading is the future tense, then “we will bear” would be a guarantee that believers would be like Jesus (and unlike Adam) in the resurrection. If the aorist subjunctive is original, then “let us bear” would be a command to show forth the image of Jesus, i.e., to live as citizens of the kingdom that believers will one day inherit. The future indicative is not widespread geographically. At the same time, it fits the context well: Not only are there indicatives in this section (especially vv. 42-49), but the conjunction καί (kai) introducing the comparative καθώς (kaqws) seems best to connect to the preceding by furthering the same argument (what is, not what ought to be). For this reason, though, the future indicative could be a reading thus motivated by an early scribe. In light of the extremely weighty evidence for the aorist subjunctive, it is probably best to regard the aorist subjunctive as original. This connects well with v. 50, for there Paul makes a pronouncement that seems to presuppose some sort of exhortation. G. D. Fee (First Corinthians [NICNT], 795) argues for the originality of the subjunctive, stating that “it is nearly impossible to account for anyone’s having changed a clearly understandable future to the hortatory subjunctive so early and so often that it made its way into every textual history as the predominant reading.” The subjunctive makes a great deal of sense in view of the occasion of 1 Corinthians. Paul wrote to combat an over-realized eschatology in which some of the Corinthians evidently believed they were experiencing all the benefits of the resurrection body in the present, and thus that their behavior did not matter. If the subjunctive is the correct reading, it seems Paul makes two points: (1) that the resurrection is a bodily one, as distinct from an out-of-body experience, and (2) that one’s behavior in the interim does make a difference (see 15:32-34, 58).