Original Meaning

PAUL BEGINS HIS final greetings and “signoff” with two verses of brief exhortation (vv. 13–14). Four parallel commands employ military metaphors to encourage resoluteness in the faith (v. 13). “Be men of courage” should probably be rendered “be adults,” that is, “put away the immaturity that has led to so many of your problems and grow up in the Lord.” Balancing these commands to be strong is the call to love in verse 14. As with Paul’s discussion of spiritual gifts in chapters 12–14, all Christian activity must take place within the sphere of putting others above self.

In verses 15–18, Paul gives thanks for three Corinthian Christians who have come to him in Ephesus and encouraged him. On Stephanas, see under 1:16. Nothing else is known about Fortunatus or Achaicus, although the former was a Hellenistic name often adopted by a freed slave (meaning “fortunate”). It is possible that both of these men, therefore, were part of Stephanas’s household, once slaves but now more like “employees,” though we have no way of being sure.

“The first converts in Achaia” (v. 15) translates an expression meaning “firstfruits” and raises the question of the apparent contradiction with Acts 17:34, in which several Athenians came to believe after Paul’s Mars Hill speech and prior to his arrival in Corinth. There are several possible solutions to this problem: Paul had actually met these men somewhere in the countryside even before arriving in Athens; he is speaking of the first “household” rather than individual converts; or the few who responded in Athens did not seem like “firstfruits,” that is, the promise of much more to come.1 But most likely Paul is simply using the term “Achaia,” as certain ancient writers did elsewhere, for the more limited territory of Corinth and its environs (the Peloponnesus), rather than for all of the southern half of Greece.2

“Devoted” in verse 15 is literally “appointed.” “The saints” are not the believers in Judea, as in verse 1, but refer primarily to the Corinthian Christians (and perhaps others) to whom these three men had ministered. Despite a vigorous debate on the meaning of “submit,” its use in verse 16 most likely means to place oneself voluntarily under the authority of someone else.3 The word-play between verses 15b and 16a is brought out well in the NRSV: “they have devoted themselves to the service of the saints; I urge you to put yourselves at the service of such people.” “Everyone who joins” (v. 16b) translates the Greek noun “coworkers.” “Labors” differs from ordinary ministry in that it implies hard work. “Supplied what was lacking” (v. 17) refers first of all to the spiritual refreshment and encouragement that Stephanas and his companions gave Paul (v. 18a). These men not only renewed Paul’s spirit but also encouraged the rest of the Corinthians. This is more naturally taken as highlighting their previous ministry to fellow believers in Corinth, but it could mean that in the very act of encouraging Paul they were also encouraging like-minded Corinthian believers. “Such men deserve recognition” (v. 18b) tones down the more forceful Greek imperative, “Recognize such people!” Such recognition would include acknowledgment of their service and an accompanying honor of submission as described in verse 16.

Verses 19–20 convey greetings to the Corinthian church from four groups of fellow believers: (1) the various churches in Asia Minor, almost certainly including Colosse and Ephesus, and possibly some of the other seven churches established in the vicinity (cf. Rev. 2–3); (2) Paul’s good friends Aquila and Priscilla, coworkers with him in Corinth (Acts 18:2–3) and later partners with him in his ministry in Ephesus (18:18–19); (3) the specific house church that met in their home; and (4) Paul’s other immediate companions in ministry. The “holy kiss” was probably borrowed from common ancient practice, both sacred and secular, Jewish and Gentile. Customarily, men greeted other men and women other women by embracing each other and kissing one another on the cheek.4

After verse 20, Paul stops dictating his letter to his amanuensis (the “secretary” writing down the letter)—was it Sosthenes (1:1)? Paul now picks up pen and papyrus himself to write the closing words in his own hand (v. 21), as was his custom (cf. Gal. 6:11; 2 Thess. 3:17; other ancient letter writers often did the same). The one letter in which we definitely know the name of Paul’s amanuensis is Romans, when that individual, Tertius, sent his own greetings at the end (Rom. 16:22).

Both parts of verse 22 follow abruptly. They may reflect conventional liturgical utterances of the early church.5 Paul’s “curse” utilizes the expression anathema, as in 12:3 (cf. also Gal. 1:8). “Come, O Lord” is the more likely of two possible translations of the Aramaic Marana tha (the other one being, “the Lord has come”). Together the two expressions reflect the profound seriousness with which the early church viewed faithfulness to Christ in view of his imminent return.

Verse 23 substitutes Paul’s favorite word for “grace” (charis) for the more conventional Greek “good-bye” (erroso). And, as in his introductory greeting, Paul makes the Christian perspective of his farewell clear with a reference to the Lord Jesus. Verse 24 ends on an upbeat note with one final reminder of his love for these often exasperating Christians in Corinth. The “Amen” is missing from some of the oldest manuscripts and may well reflect a pious addition by an early scribe.

Bridging Contexts

AS WITH HIS opening, the way to recognize what Paul stresses most in his closing is to see what is most distinctive. Ancient Greco-Roman letters did not have as conventional or formalized endings as they did beginnings, but common elements included “greetings, a health wish, the date, a concluding autograph, and postscripts.”6 Almost always there was at least one closing wish of some form. Paul himself usually includes exhortations, a wish for peace, greetings to the church addressed (including some from his various companions), and a benediction. The most striking divergence from this pattern in the closing of 1 Corinthians is the addition of the curse, combined with the call for the Lord’s return in verse 22. On the other hand, if Paul is relying here on some preexistent liturgy known to the Corinthians, then the distinctiveness of this verse is somewhat tempered.

The exhortations of verses 13–14 disclose an urgency even in Paul’s concluding remarks. The lack of connection between these two verses highlights their striking juxtaposition. Love without strength deteriorates into mere sentimentality; strength without love risks becoming tyrannical.

Verses 15–18 contain key implications for the developing concept of Christian ministry in the early church. We are still a long way from the institutionalization of early catholicism in the second century, but we see hints that Paul envisions certain authorities to whom others are to submit, a hint that we would not have necessarily received from reading 14:26.7 But the kind of authority Paul endorses is what is usually considered the most legitimate kind; it is an authority that is earned through humble service, not imposed by holding an office or dependent solely on charismatic personality or expert knowledge. One might even speak of mutual submission here; the Corinthians must submit to those who have themselves chosen to serve (or submit to) their fellow Christians.

Paul’s generalizing language (“submit to such as these” in v. 16) enables us to apply his principles widely to all similar servant-leaders. “Function, not status, was the important thing in the church’s ministry: those who did the work were to receive the appropriate recognition and respect.”8 Hebrews 13:17 generalizes a little further (“Obey your leaders and submit to their authority”), but even that command is dependent on the writer’s earlier reference in verse 7: “Remember your leaders…. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith.” Christians in all times and places should cooperate with and defer to church leaders who have earned that respect through faithful service, but no New Testament text enjoins blind subservience to authoritarian or incompetent Christian office-holders. While Paul never totally abolishes hierarchy, he radically redefines its authority in terms of service rather than privilege.

If Fortunatus and Achaicus once were slaves, then the fact that Paul calls the Corinthians to submit also to them reminds us of the radically equalizing function of the gospel across socioeconomic strata of society. Stephanas’ household could well include younger people or even children; this possibility reminds us that youth are often among the most zealous and energetically able to serve. But in lieu of more specific information about these individuals, these suggestions must remain speculative.

Sometimes Paul sends greetings from several individuals by name to a particular church he is addressing; here he mentions only Aquila and Priscilla (v. 19). Perhaps they were the only other immediate companions of his who were known to the Corinthians, besides the three men of verses 15–18. But they play a prominent role throughout the Acts and Paul’s letters as his coworkers. Interestingly, in four of the six New Testament references to this husband and wife team, Priscilla is named first (Acts 18:18, 26; Rom. 16:3; 2 Tim. 4:19; the other reference which preserves the order found here is Acts 18:2). To name a wife before her husband would have stood out in ancient letter-writing as unusual, suggesting that Priscilla may have been the more significant partner in some respect. Paul is known for elevating the role of women over against the social background of his day, even if he stops short of demonstrably promoting full-fledged egalitarianism.9

For the implications of the house-church model of ancient worship (v. 19), see under 14:26–33a. The holy kiss (v. 20) has remained a liturgical part of some Christian traditions. That it was largely limited to same sex partners in a heterosexual Christian community guarded it against having sexual overtones. Many cultures throughout church history have preserved a close parallel to this practice in public greetings more generally. Where there are dangers of arousing inappropriate desires or behavior, some other cultural analog should be sought. The point was that Christians should demonstrate their affection for one another in warm, interpersonal gestures of nonsexual intimacy, and this can be accomplished in many ways.

The greeting of verse 21 follows a letter-writing convention of antiquity, so that too much should not be read into its presence. But it is probably safe to conclude that Paul saw these words as adding a personal touch, a guarantee of the genuineness of the letter (cf. his concern in 2 Thess. 2:1–2 of a possible forgery circulating in his name), and a reiteration of his apostolic authority.

Verse 22 reminds us how foreign certain aspects of New Testament Christianity are to many other generations of church history. Some of the harshness of Paul’s language against those who do not love the Lord may be attributed to cultural convention; indeed, Paul’s anathemas are mild compared to some found among the rabbis, at Qumran, or in Greco-Roman circles.10 We must also recall that Paul has unique emotions invested in the churches to which he gave birth, and he is talking about people here who demonstrate by their beliefs or actions that they are rank unbelievers despite professing to be Christians. Only here and in Titus 3:15 does Paul use the verb phileo (meaning brotherly love) rather than agapao (the most common verb for Christian love). His choice may simply have been influenced by the cognate philema (“kiss”) in verse 20, but he may also be implying, “if anyone does not have even as much affection as φιλεῖν [i.e., the love of ordinary friends or siblings for each other].”11 Yet having said all this, Paul’s anathema still stands out as a reminder of the exclusiveness and zeal that characterized the early church’s mission.

Conversely, Marana tha in verse 22b (see NIV note, “In Aramaic the expression Come, O Lord is Marana tha) reflects a strong longing for Christ’s return by one of his servants who had experienced enough hostility in his life on this earth not to want to prolong it unnecessarily (cf. Phil. 1:21–24). Paul longed for the coming Day that would make present sufferings pale into insignificance (Rom. 8:18; 2 Cor. 4:17). The term also employs an Aramaic word for “Lord” used in some Jewish circles for Yahweh himself (mar), a vivid reminder that high Christology (Jesus as fully God) was not merely the product of a later, more Hellenistic development in the church but was part of the faith of Aramaic-speaking Jewish Christianity from its earliest days.

Despite the strong language of verse 22, Paul must nevertheless close on a positive note of encouragement. In no other letter does he end with this kind of statement of his love, but it was profoundly needed in fractured Corinth. “Paul had been stern with the Corinthian believers, but he closed his letter by assuring them of his love. After all, ‘Faithful are the wounds of a friend’ (Prov. 27:6).”12

Contemporary Significance

THE BALANCE REFLECTED in verses 13–14 between firmness and gentleness, between power and love, surely remains crucial today. Many preach love without judgment; some judgment without love. Scripture consistently holds both together.

Stephanas and his two companions (vv. 15–18) remind us that the most legitimate form of church leadership or authority in our day still remains that which is acknowledged by fellow Christians as stemming from devoted service to the saints (v. 15). While some want to abolish hierarchy and others to employ it in authoritarian fashion, servant leaders guide by loving example, to whom fellow Christians should submit (see further the applications of chap. 4, p. 93). The model of these three men should challenge all Christians today to get involved when they see a need waiting to be met, regardless of whether they hold any formal office or are first invited to participate. We are tearing down today some of the unhealthy barriers between clergy and laity; one helpful principle derivable from this text is to recognize as leaders those who have emerged from within a congregation as its most dedicated servants. Megachurches that are increasingly identifying such commitment among their own membership and then training those persons to be leaders (or sponsoring their training) may well have a good handle on the application of this principle.

The comings and goings of Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, like the frequent travels of Aquila and Priscilla to establish home congregations in each community in which they lived, remind us of the ways in which the early church was international and yet interdependent.13 In our day, when travel and communication make networking and cooperation among various parts of the body of Christ so much easier, it is all the more necessary that we take advantage of this technology. And to the extent that more and more Christians’ lives and work revolve around that technology, the need for the uniquely personal touch and for the intimacy possible among believers, so ably modeled by Paul and his coworkers, is growing rapidly.

Both parts of verse 22 call us back to a holy outrage at those who generally try to destroy or corrupt the church today, masquerading as believers. Even as we warn of God’s impending judgment against such people (Paul’s anathema), the cry Marana tha reminds us to leave that judgment to God in Christ upon his return. One thinks naturally of the various sects and cults that lead people astray in the name of Jesus; indeed many of these can trace their roots back directly or indirectly to ancient Hellenistic philosophy and even to Gnosticism (particularly the religious sciences—Christian Science, Unity School of Christianity, etc.) But we recall too that Paul’s harshest words were consistently reserved for the legalists of his day, particularly among the conservative Judaizing factions (cf. Gal. 1:6–10; Phil. 3:2–4:1). In one instance, he even declares divisiveness itself worthy of excommunication (Tit. 3:10–11). So our contemporary applications must range closer to home as well, as we scrupulously ward off and avoid the legalists in our evangelical Christian circles. Those whose long lists of dos and don’ts in their policies on Christian lifestyle go far beyond scriptural commands, like some of the extreme “witch-hunters” in our midst, ironically may be more in need of church discipline themselves than some of those they consistently attack.14

Paul’s cry of Marana tha reminds us of how much our world, even our Christian world, lives in the present without longing for the age to come. We have already spoken of this generation’s attempt to create Paradise on earth rather than genuinely longing for Christ’s return and the perfect new heavens and new earth that will subsequently be created (see above, pp. 310–11). Little wonder that the 1970s film, Heaven Can Wait, about a professional football quarterback who died in a car accident and was disappointed to find himself in heaven because he would miss out on the Super Bowl, proved so popular. Its story line remains as timely and poignant at the end of the century.

Fittingly, Paul closes with one final reminder of the centrality of “grace” and “love” (vv. 23–24). We continue to need both; indeed, we ought to crave them. For detailed application, see under chapter 13. If our generation has sometimes removed God from the concept of love, it has at least correctly captured the centrality of love for any viable human ethic. Love does “make the world go ‘round,” but the only truly life-and world-changing love that will last is that which is founded on a saving relationship with Jesus Christ.