48648713 i-corinthians-13-commentary

I CORITHIAS 13 COMMETARY
Written and edited by Glenn Pease
PREFACE
I have collected the thoughts of many authors old and new on this most famous
chapter on love. I have collected paraphrases of it, and poems of it that I have put in
an appendix series at the end. Sometimes I have just taken a quote, and other times
I have kept an entire article or message. If anyone does not want their wisdom
shared in this way they can let me know and I will remove it. My e-mail is
glenn_p86@yahoo.com
ITRODUCTIO
1. The good news of this chapter is that it puts all believers on a common level. They
may have many gifts and a great variety of skills that set them apart, but in the end,
all have the one thing that makes them acceptable and approved by God, and that is
love. It is not like other gifts that set people apart for being popular, or rich and
famous. Many believers have gifts that lead them to become celebrities both in the
church and in the world. The great mass of believers do not have any such gift, or at
least not in great enough measure to make them exalted to a high level of fame. ot
all can hope for or expect such gifts, but all can still achieve what is highest in value
to God, and pleasing God is the highest goal you can achieve in life. It is love that
leads to this level. Love is able to choose all of the ways to fulfill the law of God in
loving God and our neighbor as ourselves. All of the virtues in this chapter are hard
to achieve in terms of feelings.
I do not always feel like being patient, kind,or non envious. I sometimes feel like
boasting and feel proud. I sometimes am self seeking and easily angered, and do
keep a record of wrongs. My nature is to feel in these negative ways, and so my
feelings are opposed to love. Love, however, is not a matter of feeling. When I am
feeling these negative emotions, that is when I need love to guide my actions and
choices. I can feel impatient, but still choose to be kind and wait my turn rather
than pridefully force my way to the front. Love is a choice to resist the natural
feeling to put self first, and to instead put others first. If love was just doing what
you feel like it would not be a display of the mind and will of Jesus. Love to be

Christlike must be constantly choosing to go against the grain of the emotions, and
to choose what is beneficial to others.
2. One of the most important things we need to grasp about love is that it is a choice.
Love is not an emotion, but a matter of the will. Love is a choice. Preceptaustin
quotes, “Agape is a love which impels the one loving to sacrifice himself for the
benefit of the person loved. God’s love must be seen in full bloom in the life of every
disciple of Christ. Agape love is the love of choice, the love of serving with humility,
the highest kind of love, the noblest kind of devotion, the love of the will
(intentional, a conscious choice) which is not motivated by superficial appearance,
emotional attraction, or sentimental relationship. Agape is not based on pleasant
emotions or good feelings that might result from a physical attraction or a familial
bond. Agape chooses as an act of self-sacrifice to serve the recipient.”
If you will examine I Cor. 13 carefully, you will notice that everything described as
love (which is the meaning of the word charity in some Bible versions) is related not
to feelings, but to the other two diminsions of love, namely the behaviors toward the
love object and the giving of respect and acceptance. It is possible, therefore, for the
feeling component to be almost absent and yet for their to be a tremendously deep
love present. It also works the other way around. When a husband says to me, I
don't feel that I'm in love with my wife anymore, I usually reply, When last did
you behave toward her as if you loved her? And then I see something remarkable
happen. As soon as partners start behaving toward each other as if they still were in
love, they begin to report that the feeling of being in love comes back. When they
start being kind, patient, tolerant, unprovoking, and believing in truth, they feel in
love again.”
2B. John Wesley, “We know, All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is
therefore true and right concerning all things. But we know, likewise, that there are
some Scriptures which more immediately commend themselves to every man's
conscience. In this rank we may place the passage before us; there are scarce any
that object to it. On the contrary, the generality of men very readily appeal to it.
othing is more common than to find even those who deny the authority of the Holy
Scriptures, yet affirming, This is my religion; that which is described in the
thirteenth chapter of the Corinthians. ay, even a Jew, Dr. unes, a Spanish
physician, then settled at Savannah, in Georgia, used to say with great earnestness,
That Paul of Tarsus was one of the finest writers I have ever read. I wish the
thirteenth chapter of his first letter to the Corinthians were wrote in letters of gold.
And I wish every Jew were to carry it with him wherever he went. He judged, (and
herein he certainly judged right) that this single chapter contained the whole of true
religion. It contains whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure,
whatsoever things are lovely: If there be any virtue, if there be any praise, it is all
contained in this.”
2C. G. Campbell Morgan, “From the standpoint of literature this is one of the most
remarkable passages that ever came from the pen of man.”

2D. Alan Redpath said one could get a spiritual suntan from the warmth of this
chapter!”
3. John MacArthur, “Agape love is the greatest virtue of the Christian life. Yet that
type of love was rare in pagan Greek literature. That’s because the traits agape
portrays—unselfishness, self-giving, willful devotion, concern for the welfare of
others—were mostly disdained in ancient Greek culture as signs of weakness.
However, the ew Testament declares agape to be the character trait around which
all others revolve. The apostle John writes, “God is love, and the one who abides in
love abides in God, and God abides in him” (1 John 4:16).
Agape Love is an attitude of selflessness. Biblical agape love is a matter of the will
and not a matter of feeling or emotion, though deep feelings and emotions almost
always accompany love. God’s loving the world was not a matter simply of feeling;
it resulted in His sending His only Son to redeem the world (Jn 3:16). Love is self-less
giving, always self-less and always giving. It is the very nature and substance of
love to deny self and to give to others...We can only have such love when Christ is
free to work His own love through us. We cannot fulfill any of Christ’s commands
without Christ Himself, least of all His command to love. We can only love as Christ
loves when He has free reign in our hearts...When the Spirit empowers our lives and
Christ is obeyed as the Lord of our hearts, our sins and weaknesses are dealt with
and we find ourselves wanting to serve others, wanting to sacrifice for them and
serve them—because Christ’s loving nature has truly become our own. Loving is the
supernatural attitude of the Christian, because love is the nature of Christ. When a
Christian does not love he has to do so intentionally and with effort—just as he must
do to hold his breath. To become habitually unloving he must habitually resist
Christ as the Lord of his heart. To continue the analogy to breathing, when Christ
has his proper place in our hearts, we do not have to be told to love—just as we do
not have to be told to breathe. Eventually it must happen, because loving is as
natural to the spiritual person as breathing is to the natural person. Though it is
unnatural for the Christian to be unloving, it is still possible to be disobedient in
regard to love. Just as loving is determined by the will and not by circumstances or
other people, so is not loving. If a husband fails in his love for his wife, or she for
him, it is never because of the other person, regardless of what the other person may
have done. You do not fall either into or out of agape love, because it is controlled
by the will. Romantic love can be beautiful and meaningful, and we find many
favorable accounts of it in Scripture. But it is agape love that God commands
husbands and wives to have for each other (Ep 5:25, 28, 33-see notes Ephesians
5:25; 28; 33 cf. Titus 2:4-note; etc.)—the love that each person controls by his own
act of will. Strained relations between husbands and wives, between fellow workers,
between brothers and sisters, or between any others is never a matter of
incompatibility or personality conflict but is always a matter of sin...Loving others is
an act of obedience, and not loving them is an act of disobedience.

The absence of (agape) love is the presence of sin. The absence of love has nothing
at all to do with what is happening to us, but everything to do with what is
happening in us. Sin and love are enemies, because sin and God are enemies. They
cannot coexist. Where one is, the other is not. The loveless life is the ungodly life;
and the godly life is the serving, caring, tenderhearted, affectionate, self–giving,
self–sacrificing life of Christ’s love working through the believer”
4. F B Meyer wrote the following regarding agape love... Wherever there is true
love, there must be giving, and giving to the point of sacrifice. Love is not satisfied
with giving trinkets; it must give at the cost of sacrifice: it must give blood, life, all.
And it was so with the love of God. He so loved the world, that He gave his only-begotten
Son. Christ also loved and gave Himself up, an offering and a sacrifice
to God. We are to imitate God's love in Christ. The love that gives, that counts no
cost too great, and, in sacrificing itself for others, offers all to God, and does all for
His sake. Such was the love of Jesus--sweet to God, as the scent of fields of new
mown grass in June; and this must be our model. ot to those who love us, but who
hate; not to those who are pleasant and agreeable, but who repel; not because our
natural feelings are excited, but because we will to minister, even to the point of the
cross, must our love go out. And every time we thus sacrifice ourselves to another
for the sake of the love of God, we enter into some of the meaning of the sacrifice of
Calvary, and there is wafted up to God the odor of a sweet smell.”
5. Wuest explains that phileo love is an unimpassioned love, a friendly love. It is a
love that is called out of one’s heart as a response to the pleasure one takes in a
person or object. It is based upon an inner community between the person loving
and the person or object loved. That is, both have things in common with one
another. The one loving finds a reflection of his own nature in the person or thing
loved. It is a love of liking, an affection for someone or something that is the
outgoing of one’s heart in delight to that which affords pleasure. The Greeks made
much of friendship, and this word was used by them to designate this form of
mutual attraction....We gather, therefore, that agape is a love of devotion (Ed
note: and volition), while phileō is a love of emotion. There is another distinction we
must be careful to note, and that is that agape is love that has ethical qualities about
it, obligations, responsibilities, where phileō is a non-ethical love, making no ethical
demands upon the person loving.
In contrasting phileo and agape love, we might say that the former is a love of
pleasure, the latter a love of preciousness; the former a love of delight, the latter a
love of esteem; the former a love called out of the heart by the apprehension of
pleasurable qualities in the object loved, the latter a love called out of the heart by
the apprehension of valuable qualities in the object loved; the former takes
pleasure in, the latter ascribes value to; the former is a love of liking, the latter a
love of prizing.”

6. Donald W. Burdick gives the following excellent summary of agape love: It is
spontaneous. There was nothing of value in the persons loved that called forth such
sacrificial love. God of His own free will set His love on us in spite of our enmity and
sin. [Agape] is love that is initiated by the lover because he wills to love, not because
of the value or lovableness of the person loved. [Agape] is self-giving. and is not
interested in what it can gain, but in what it can give. It is not bent on satisfying the
lover, but on helping the one loved whatever the cost. [Agape] is active and is not
mere sentiment cherished in the heart. or is it mere words however eloquent. It
does involve feeling and may express itself in words, but it is primarily an attitude
toward another that moves the will to act in helping to meet the need of the one
loved. (Burdick, D W: The Letters of John the Apostle (Chicago: Moody, 1985, page
351)
7. WWWWiiiilllllllliiiiaaaammmm BBBBaaaarrrrccccllllaaaayyyy notes that aaaaggggaaaappppeeee indicates an... unconquerable benevolence,
invincible goodwill...If we regard a person with agape, it means that no matter what
that person does to us, no matter how he treats us, no matter if he insults us or
injures us or grieves us, we will never allow any bitterness against him to invade our
hearts, but will regard him with that unconquerable benevolence and goodwill
which will seek nothing but his highest good....In the case of our nearest and our
dearest we cannot help loving them; we speak of falling in love; it is something
which comes to us quite unsought; it is something which is born of the emotions of
the heart. But in the case of our enemies, (agape) love is not only something of the
heart; it is also something of the will. It is not something which we cannot help; it is
something which we have to will ourselves into doing (Ed note: enabled by the Spirit
Whose fruit in yielded believers is agape love). It is in fact a victory over that
which comes instinctively to the natural man. Agape does not mean a feeling of the
heart, which we cannot help, and which comes unbidden and unsought; it means a
determination of the mind, whereby we achieve this unconquerable goodwill even to
those who hurt and injure us. Agape, someone has said, is the power to love those
whom we do not like and who may not like us. In point of fact we can only have
agape when Jesus Christ enables us to conquer our natural tendency to anger and to
bitterness, and to achieve this invincible goodwill to all men.
Agape, is that unconquerable benevolence, that undefeatable good-will, which will
never seek anything but the highest good of others, no matter what they do to us,
and no matter how they treat us. That love can come to us only when Christ, Who is
that love, comes to dwell within our hearts... (Agape) ...will never dream of
revenge, but will meet all injuries and rebuffs with undefeatable good will. Agape is
that quality of mind and heart which compels a Christian never to feel any
bitterness, never to feel any desire for revenge, but always to seek the highest good
of every man no matter what he may be. If a man has agape, no matter what other
people do to him or say of him, he will seek nothing but their good. He will never be
bitter, never resentful, never vengeful; he will never allow himself to hate; he will
never refuse to forgive. Love, agape, is the virtue of the man who, even if he tried,
could not forget what God has done for him nor the love of God to men.

Agape is the word for Christian love. Agape is not passion with its ebb and flow, its
flicker and its flame; nor is it an easy-going and indulgent sentimentalism. And it is
not an easy thing to acquire or a light thing to exercise. Agape is undefeatable
goodwill; it is the attitude towards others which, no matter what they do, will never
feel bitterness and will always seek their highest good. There is a love which seeks to
possess; there is a love which softens and enervates; there is a love which withdraws
a man from the battle; there is a love which shuts its eyes to faults and to ways
which end in ruin. But Christian love will always seek the highest good of others and
will accept all the difficulties, all the problems and all the toil which search involves.
(Barclay, W: The Daily Study Bible Series, Rev. ed. Philadelphia: The Westminster
Press)
8. The loss of love is the loss of power in all gifts, for the Holy Spirit will not
empower any gift that lacks love. We are like Samson leaping to his feet to fight the
Philistines after his hair was cut. He did not realize that he was powerless, for God
removed his power for his folly of telling his secret. When we lack love we do the
same thing. We cut our source of power, and so all that we do will be fruitless
without the power of love. The believer who has few gifts who is loving will be far
more powerful as a servant of Christ than one with many gifts who lack love.
9. The greatest, strongest, deepest thing Paul ever wrote (Harnack).
10. “This hymn in praise of love is of importance with regard to the question of St
Paul s personal knowledge of Jesus Christ. It is too often forgotten that Saul of
Tarsus was a contemporary of our Lord, and the tendency of historical criticism at
the present time is to place the date of Saul s conversion not very long after the
Ascension. Furrer and Clemen would argue for this. Saul may not have been in
Jerusalem at the time of the Crucifixion and Resurrection ; but he would have
abundant means of getting evidence at first hand about both, after the Appearance
on the road to Damascus had made it imperative that he should do so ; and some
have seen evidence of exact knowledge of the life and character of Jesus of azareth
in this marvelous analysis of the nature and attributes of Love. We have only, it is
said, to substitute Jesus for Love throughout the chapter, and St Paul s panegyric
becomes a simple and perfect description of the historic Jesus author unknown
11. Don Krow gives us an understanding of the different kinds of love in the Greek
language:
“In the ew Testament period there were four major Greek words that were used.
Eros - A word that was not actually used in the ew Testament but was alluded to.
It meant sexual passion; arousal, its gratification and fulfillment. The Greek word is
probably not used in the ew Testament because the origin of the word came from
the mythical god Eros, the god of love. It is inferred in many scriptures and is the
only kind of love that God restricts to a one-man, one-woman relationship within

the bounds of marriage (Heb. 13:4; Song 1:13; 4:5-6; 7:7-9; 8:10; 1 Cor. 7:25; Eph.
5:31).
Storge - Storge is the natural bond between mother and infant, father, children, and
kin. William Barclay states, We cannot help loving our kith and kin; blood is
thicker than water (.T. Words, 1974).
Phileo - Phileo love is a love of the affections. It is delighting to be in the presence of
another, a warm feeling that comes and goes with intensity. The Bible encourages it
but it is never a direct command. God never commands phileo since this type of love
is based on the feelings. God Himself did not phileo the world but rather operated in
agape love towards us. I cannot have a warm tender feeling toward an enemy but I
can agape love them.
Agape - Agape love is God's kind of love. It is seeking the welfare and betterment of
another regardless of how we feel. Agape does not have the primary meaning of
feelings or affection. Jesus displayed it when he went to the cross and died for you
and me regardless of how He felt. In the gospels Jesus prayed, ..Father, if it be
possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt (Mt.
26:39; Mk. 14:36; Lk. 22:41-43; Jn. 18:11). Jesus sought the betterment of you and
me, regardless of His feelings. Matthew 7:12 states it this way, So whatever you
wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the law and the prophets
(RSV).
12. WHAT IS LOVE? “It is the foundation for all that is precious. It is the basis for
marriage and family. It is the basis for patriotism and love of country. It is the basis
for salvation in that God so loved the world that He gave His only Son for our
salvation. Love is the basis for all relationships that we treasure, including our
relationship to God.
The Greek language has four words for love. Eros which is physical desire to
possess someone or something for pleasure. Storge which refers to the quiet kind of
affection and appreciation that one has for another's spirit or intellect. It is
illustrated by one listening to a musician and saying, Oh! Don't you just love
him? Philia which means brotherly love or friendship. Agape which is the highest
form of love, which is giving love, and a love that operates without relation to the
worthiness of the one loved.
Though only the the last two words are used in the ew Testament, the other two
are present in experience. All four of them are parts of the total experience of love
in the Christian life, and all four are basic to a happy Christian marriage. Though
eros is on the level of the physical, and is the kind of love which, by itself, is lust,
and, therefore, the mother of mulitudes of perversion, it is not to be looked upon as
an evil. On the contrary, it is a gift of God, and when kept in balance with God's
will is a great blessing. When we ask the question, what is love? We must be aware
that the answer must include all that love is, and it is physical, mental, and spiritual.
This greatest of God's gifts touches the whole man, body, soul, and spirit. The
Christian is one that wants his love experienced on all levels to be in conformity to
the will of God.

Every Christian loves on the level of eros, that is with his body. The essential
element here is to satisfy desire. This involves sex but is not limitied to that plane.
One can also hunger and thirst after righteousness. One can have a desire to possess
knowledge and abilities, or even things such as books or records in order to satisfy a
craving. This is eros love, and all of the appeals of reward are directed to eros love.
It is not evil in itself on the physical or super physical plane even though it is the
love most often used to describe the wicked.
Philia is an obvious part of a Christian life. There must be much appreciation and
friendship in lives controled by the love of Christ. The point of all this is that we
recognize that the highest form of love, which is agape, does not take the place of the
others and eliminate them, but it rescues them from the bondage of sin and sets
them free to be what God intended them to be. The agape love given to the believer
by Christ lifts eros and philia to a level pleasing in the sight of God. Heb. 13:1-4
speaks of both brotherly love and sexual love. Let brotherly love continue. Be not
forgetful to entertain strangers for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.
Remember them that are in bonds, as bound with them; and them which suffer
adversity, as being yourselves also in the body. Marriage is honorable and all, and
the bed undefiled, but whoremongers and adulters God will judge. ote that when
eros love is dwelt with there is warning against its perversion because perversion
was common then, and eros is always the easiest to pervert.
When we sing love Love Lifted Me, we can keep in mind that love also lifted love in
me that I might love God and man as I ought, and thereby fullfil the whole law. The
love that did this, and does this, is the love of Christ which is agape, and it is this
love that Paul calls the greatest of God's gifts. The Corinthian church was having
problems on the level of eros and philia. Inmoral and unkind acts were common.
In the immediate context Paul is concerned with their unbrotherly attitudes
concerning gifts. There was contention and division over the value and importance
of the various gifts. Instead of setting up a list of the order of their importance, Paul
inserts this great poem of love to make it clear that the greatest gift is love, and all
the others are without value without it, but all can be of value with it. Agape then
determines all the value in the Christian life. What is love? It is the essence of God.
It is the essence of Christianity. Rowland Hill wrote, Cultivate the spirit of love.
Love is the diamond amongst the jewels of the believer's breastplate. The other
graces shine like the precious stones of nature, with their own peculiar luster and
various hues, but the diamond is white. ow, in white all the colors are united, so in
love is centered every other grace and virtue.”
13. In this chapter Paul makes it clear that love is the essence of what God wants
man to become in Christ. It is not just one of the ingredients of perfection, but the
most essential ingredient of all, for without it all other ingredients are of no value.
Take love out of the mixture and all the highest goals of the Christian life fall flat.
Look at the place of love in the ew Testament.

God is love (I John 4:8, 16). Love is from God (I John 4:7). His love is
perfected in us (I John 4:12). Perfect love casts out fear (I John 4:18). The one
who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him.....He has given us of His
Spirit (I John 4:16, 13). The fruit of the Spirit is love..... (Gal. 5:22). A new
commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you,
that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples,
if you have love for one another! (John 13:34-35). And this commandment we
have from Him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also (I John
4:21). We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the
brethren. He who does not love abides in death (I John 3:14).
You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and
with all your mind. This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like
it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend
the whole Law and the Prophets (Matt. 22:37-40). Owe nothing to anyone except
to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. For this,
'You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall
not covet,' and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying,
'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' Love does no wrong to a neighbor; love
therefore is the fulfillment of the Law (Rom. 13:8-10).
14. An author who lists his name as Jim only gives us these statistics on love.
There are two Greek words for love used
in the ew Testament.
“Agape/Agapao” and “Phileo”.
Here is a break down on
“Agape/Agapao”:
Agape (noun) is used 116 times
in the ew Testament.
Agapao (verb) is used 146 times in the
Combined that’s 262 uses of Agape/Agapao in the ew Testament.
15. There are a variety of ways to outline this chapter, and below are a few of them.
John Wesley outlines it-
1. The Value of Love.
2. The Virtues of Love.
3. The Victories of Love.
1. THE DAGER OF ITS ABSECE.
2. THE DYAMICS OF ITS PRESECE.
3. THE DURABILITY OF ITS ESSECE.

1. THE ECESSITY OF LOVE.
2. THE ATURE OF LOVE.
3. THE OBILITY OF LOVE- IT IS KIG OF ALL THE VIRTUES.
1. THE POWER OF LOVE.
2. THE PORTRAIT OF LOVE OR THE PRACTICE OF LOVE.
3. THE PERMAECE OF LOVE.
1. THE EXCLUSIO OF LOVE.
2. THE EXCELLECE OF LOVE.
3. THE ETERITY OF LOVE.
1. THE ABSECE OF LOVE.
2. THE ATTRIBUTES OF LOVE.
3. THE ABSOLUTEESS OF LOVE.
1. THE DEIAL OF LOVE.
2. THE DESIG OF LOVE.
3. THE DURATIO OF LOVE.
Love
1. If I speak in the tongues[a] of men and of angels,
but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or
a clanging cymbal.
1. Barnes, “Though I speak with the tongues of men - Though I should be able to
speak all the languages which are spoken by people. To speak foreign languages was
regarded then, as it is now, as a rare and valuable endowment; compare Virgil,
Aeneas vi. 625ff. The word “I” here is used in a popular sense, and the apostle
designs to illustrate, as he often does, his idea by a reference to himself, which, it is
evident, he wishes to be understood as applying to those whom he addressed. It is
evident that among the Corinthians the power of speaking a foreign language was
regarded as a signally valuable endowment; and there can be no doubt that some of
the leaders in that church valued themselves especially on it; see 1 Cor. 14. To
correct this, and to show them that all this would be vain without love, and to induce

them, therefore, to seek for love as a more valuable endowment, was the design of
the apostle in this passage. Of this verse Dr. Bloomfield, than whom, perhaps, there
is no living man better qualified to give such an opinion, remarks, that “it would be
difficult to find a finer passage than this in the writings of Demosthenes himself.”
And of angels - The language of angels; such as they speak. Were I endowed with
the faculty of eloquence and persuasion which we attribute to them; and the power
of speaking to any of the human family with the power which they have. The
language of angels here seems to be used to denote the highest power of using
language, or of the most elevated faculty of eloquence and speech. It is evidently
derived from the idea that the angels are “superior” in all respects to human beings;
that they must have endowments in advance of all which man can have. It may
possibly have reference to the idea that they must have some mode of
communicating their ideas one to another, and that this dialect or mode must be far
superior to that which is employed by man. Man is imperfect. All his modes of
communication are defective. We attribute to the angels the idea of perfection; and
the idea here is, that even though a man had a far higher faculty of speaking
languages than would be included in the endowment of speaking all the languages of
human beings as people speak them, and even had the higher and more perfect
mode of utterance which the angels have, and yet were destitute of love, all would be
nothing. It is possible that Paul may have some allusion here to what he refers to in
2Co_12:4, where he says that when he was caught up into paradise, he heard
unspeakable words which it was not possible for a man to utter. To this higher,
purer language of heaven he may refer here by the language of the angels. It was not
with him mere “conjecture” of what that language might be; it was language which
he had been permitted himself to hear. Of that scene he would refain a most deep
and tender recollection; and to that language he now refers, by saying that even that
elevated language would be valueless to a creature if there were not love.
And have not charity - (ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω agapēn de mē echō . And have not
love. This is the proper and usual meaning of the Greek word. The English word
charity is used in a great variety of senses; and some of them cannot be included in
the meaning of the word here. It means:
(1) In a general sense, love, benevolence, good-will;
(2) In theology, it includes supreme love to God and universal good-will to
mankind;
(3) In a more particular sense, it denotes the love and kindness which springs
from the natural relations, as the “charities” of father, son, brother;
(4) Liberality to the poor, to the needy, and to objects of beneficence, as we speak
commonly of “charity,” meaning almsgiving, and of charitable societies;
(5) “Candor” liberality in judging of people’s actions indulgence to their opinions;
attributing to them good motives and intentions; a disposition to judge of them
favorably, and to put on their words and actions the best construction. This is a very
common signification of the word in our language now, and this is one modification
of the word “love,” as all such charity is supposed to proceed from “love” to our
neighbor, and a desire that he should have a right to his opinions as well as we to

ours. The Greek word ἀγάπη agapē means properly “love,” affection, regard, good-will,
benevolence. It is applied:
(a) To love in general;
(b) To the love of God and of Christ;
(c) The love which God or Christ exercises toward Christians, Rom_5:5;
Eph_2:4; 2Th_3:5;
(d) The effect, or proof of beneficence, favor conferred: Eph_1:15; 2Th_2:10;
1Jo_3:1. Robinson, Lexicon.
In the English word “charity,” therefore, there are now some ideas which are not
found in the Greek word, and especially the idea of “almsgiving,” and the common
use of the word among us in the sense of “candor” or “liberality in judging.”
either of these ideas, perhaps, are to be found in the use of the word in the chapter
before us; and the more proper translation would have been, in accordance with the
usual mode of translation in the ew Testament, love. Tyndale in his translation,
renders it by the word “love.” The “love” which is referred to in this chapter, and
illustrated, is mainly “love to man” 1Co_13:4-7; though there is no reason to doubt
that the apostle meant also to include in the general term love to God, or love in
general. His illustrations, however, are chiefly drawn from the effects of love toward
people. It properly means love to the whole church, love to the whole world; love to
all creatures which arises from true piety, and which centers ultimately in God -
Doddridge. It is this love whose importance Paul, in this beautiful chapter,
illustrates as being more valuable than the highest possible endowments without it.
It is not necessary to suppose that anyone had these endowments, or had the power
of speaking with the tongues of human beings and angels; or had the gift of
prophecy, or had the highest degree of faith who had no love. The apostle supposes a
case; and says that if it were so, if all these were possessed without love, they would
be comparatively valueless; or that love was a more valuable endowment than all
the others would be without it.
I am become - I am. I shall be.
As sounding brass - Probably a “trumpet.” The word properly means brass; then
that which is made of brass; a trumpet, or wind instrument of any kind made of
brass or copper. The sense is that of a sounding or resounding instrument, making a
great noise, apparently of great importance, and yet without vitality; a mere
instrument; a base metal that merely makes a sound. Thus, noisy, valueless, empty,
and without vitality would be the power of speaking all languages without love.
Or a tinkling cymbal - A cymbal giving a clanging, clattering sound. The word
rendered “tinkling” (ἀλαλάζον alalazon, from ἄλαλή alalē or αλαλα alala, a “war-cry”)
properly denotes a loud cry, or shout, such as is used in battle; and then also a
loud cry or mourning, cries of lamentation or grief; the loud “shrick” of sorrow,
Mar_5:38, “Them that wept and wailed greatly.” It then means a clanging or
clattering sound, such as was made on a cymbal. The cymbal is a well-known
instrument, made of two pieces of brass or other metal, which, being struck
together, gives a tinkling or clattering sound. Cymbals arc commonly used in
connection with other music. They make a tinkling, or clanging, with very little
variety of sound. The music is little adapted to produce emotion, or to excite feeling.

There is no melody and no harmony. They were, therefore, well adapted to express
the idea which the apostle wished to convey. The sense is, “If I could speak all
languages, yet if I had not love, the faculty would be like the clattering. clanging
sound of the cymbal, that contributes nothing to the welfare of others. It would all
be hollow, vain, useless. It could neither save me nor others, any more than the notes
of the trumpet, or the jingling of the cymbal, would promote salvation. “Love” is the
vital principle; it is that without which all ether endowments are useless and vain.”
1B. Biblical Illustrator, “ This chapter is a noble hymn ; scarce anywhere else
does Paul seem so wholly possessed with his subject. The very words themselves
have something about them of the grace which they describe. They sound like
angelic harmonies. I. See how the apostle tears up by the roots many a sign
OF acceptance on which men are accustomed to rely. 1. What a noble thing it
is to have the power of speech to move men's souls ! o wonder that men put
such a price upon eloquence. However, so long as it is employed in mere worldly
interests, whose soul is the better for it? If charity breathe into it and give it life,
it is well. But if you substitute fine talking, dressed out with the names of God
and Christ, it is not a blessing to you, but a curse. Learn to love, and away with
the ready tongue and fluent profession. 2. Even in worldly matters, and, specially,
in God's works, knowledge is a great and noble thing, and much more so when
conversant with things Divine. But men are led to fancy that this is religion itself.
But though your minds were so enlarged that they could contain all mysteries and
all knowledge, yet if charity be not there, not only is all this knowledge cold and
dead, majestic like some great building, but with no soul in it ; but it profits nothing,
it will not bring you on one step to heaven !
It is the aim of religion to lift men out of their natural unregenerate selves, and, so
far as their human nature is capable of such exaltation, to make them more like God
: to produce and increase in them some feeble counterpart of that moral goodness
which we worship in the perfection of the Divine Being. ow charity is the road
which alone brings us on this heavenly journey, and each one of the several
exhibitions of the same blessed spirit, which are detailed for us by St. Paul in the
chapter now before us, is one more added to the golden steps that carry the
Christian higher and higher towards the throne of God. I said that by the practice
of charity men are made more like God, for, if we take those parts of the description
of it which are applicable to the case, we shall find that they are a description not
only of what man ought to aspire to be, but of what God Himself is, so far as He
reveals Himself in His dealings with men.
1C. Coffman, “Tongues of men and of angels ...
o affirmation is made here regarding the language of angels. Hodge paraphrased
this as all languages, human or divine. That the speech of angels should have been
brought in here could have derived from Paul's own experience in which he was
caught up into heaven and heard words unspeakable, unlawful to utter
(2 Corinthians 12:4 ). There is also an assumption here that angels are superior in

all respects to men. Thus, Paul made his argument more overwhelming with the
contrast between the tongues of angels and the distressing tongues of Corinth.
1D. Language without love makes you a loser.
2. Clarke, “Though I speak, etc. - At the conclusion of the preceding chapter the
apostle promised to show the Corinthians a more excellent way than that in which
they were now proceeding. They were so distracted with contentions, divided by
parties, and envious of each other’s gifts, that unity was nearly destroyed. This was
a full proof that love to God and man was wanting; and that without this, their
numerous gifts and other graces were nothing in the eyes of God; for it was evident
that they did not love one another, which is a proof that they did not love God; and
consequently, that they had not true religion. Having, by his advices and directions,
corrected many abuses, and having shown them how in outward things they should
walk so as to please God, he now shows them the spirit, temper, and disposition in
which this should be done, and without which all the rest must be ineffectual.
Before I proceed to the consideration of the different parts of this chapter, it may
be necessary to examine whether the word αγαπη be best translated by charity or
love. Wiclif, translating from the Vulgate, has the word charity; and him our
authorized version follows. But Coverdale, Matthews, Cranmer, and the Geneva
Bible, have love; which is adopted by recent translators and commentators in
general; among whom the chief are Dodd, Pearce, Purver, Wakefield, and Wesley;
all these strenuously contend that the word charity, which is now confined to
almsgiving, is utterly improper; and that the word love, alone expresses the apostle’s
sense. As the word charity seems now to express little else than almsgiving, which,
performed even to the uttermost of a man’s power, is nothing if he lack what the
apostle terms αγαπη, and which we here translate charity; it is best to omit the use
of a word in this place which, taken in its ordinary signification, makes the apostle
contradict himself; see 1Co_13:3 : Though I give all my goods to feed the poor, and
have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. That is: “Though I have the utmost
charity, and act in every respect according to its dictates, yet, if I have not charity,
my utmost charity is unprofitable.” Therefore, to shun this contradiction, and the
probable misapplication of the term, Love had better be substituted for Charity!
The word αγαπη, love, I have already considered at large in the note on
Mat_22:37; and to that place I beg leave to refer the reader for its derivation and
import. Our English word love we have from the Teutonic leben to live, because love
is the means, dispenser, and preserver of life; and without it life would have nothing
desirable, nor indeed any thing even supportable: or it may be taken immediately
from the Anglo-Saxon lofa and lufa love, from lufan and lufian, to desire, to love, to
favor. It would be ridiculous to look to the Greek verb φιλειν for its derivation.
Having said so much about the word love, we should say something of the word
charity, which is supposed to be improper in this place. Charity comes to us
immediately from the French charite, who borrowed it from the Latin charitas,
which is probably borrowed from the Greek χαρις, signifying grace or favor, or
χαρα, joy, as a benefit bestowed is a favor that inspires him who receives it with joy;
and so far contributes to his happiness. The proper meaning of the word Charus, is

dear, costly; and Charitas, is dearth, scarcity, a high price, or dearness. Hence, as in
times of dearth or scarcity, many, especially the poor, must be in want, and the
benevolent will be excited to relieve them; the term which expressed the cause of this
want was applied to the disposition which was excited in behalf of the sufferer. ow,
as he who relieves a person in distress, and preserves his life by communicating a
portion of his property to him, will feel a sort of interest in the person thus
preserved; Hence he is said to be dear to him: i.e. he has cost him something; and he
values him in proportion to the trouble or expense he has cost him. Thus charity
properly expresses that affectionate attachment we may feel to a person whose
wants we have been enabled to relieve; but originally it signified that want of the
necessaries of life which produced dearth or dearness of those necessaries; and
brought the poor man into that state in which he stood so much in need of the active
benevolence of his richer neighbor. If the word be applied to God’s benevolence
towards man, it comes in with all propriety and force: we are dear to God, for we
have not been purchased with silver or gold, but with the precious (τιμιῳ αἱματι,
costly) blood of Christ, who so loved us as to give his life a ransom for ours.
The tongues of men - All human languages, with all the eloquence of the most
accomplished orator.
And of angels - i.e. Though a man knew the language of the eternal world so well
that he could hold conversation with its inhabitants, and find out the secrets of their
kingdom. Or, probably, the apostle refers to a notion that was common among the
Jews, that there was a language by which angels might be invoked, adjured,
collected, and dispersed; and by the means of which many secrets might be found
out, and curious arts and sciences known.
There is much of this kind to be found in their cabalistical books, and in the books
of many called Christians. Cornelius Agrippa’s occult philosophy abounds in this;
and it was the main object of Dr. Dee’s actions with spirits to get a complete
vocabulary of this language. See what has been published of his work by Dr.
Casaubon; and the remaining manuscript parts in the Sloane library, in the British
museum.
In Bava Bathra, fol. 134, mention is made of a famous rabbin, Jochanan ben
Zaccai, who understood the language of devils, trees, and angels.
Some think that the apostle means only the most splendid eloquence; as we
sometimes apply the word angelic to signify any thing sublime, grand, beautiful,
etc.; but it is more likely that he speaks here after the manner of his countrymen,
who imagined that there was an angelic language which was the key to many
mysteries; a language which might be acquired, and which, they say, had been
learned by several.
Sounding brass - Χαλκος ηχων· That is, like a trumpet made of brass; for
although; χαλκος signifies brass, and aes signifies the same, yet we know the latter is
often employed to signify the trumpet, because generally made of this metal. Thus
Virgil, when he represents Misenus endeavoring to fright away the harpies with the
sound of his trumpet: -

Ergo, ubi delapsae sonitum per curva dedere
Littora, dat signum specula Misenus ab alta
Aere cavo: invadunt socii, et nova praelia tentant,
Obscoenas pelagi ferro faedare volucres.
Aeneid, lib. iii. ver. 238.
Then as the harpies from the hills once more
Poured shrieking down, and crowded round the shore,
On his high stand Misenus sounds from far
The brazen trump, the signal of the war.
With unaccustomed fight, we flew to slay
The forms obscene, dread monsters of the sea.
Pitt.
The metal of which the instrument was made is used again for the instrument
itself, in that fine passage of the same poet, Aeneid, lib. ix. ver. 603, where he
represents the Trojans rushing to battle against the Volsciane: -
At tuba terribilem sonitum procul aere canoro
Increpuit: sequitur clamor, caelumque remugit.
And now the trumpets, terrible from far,
With rattling clangour rouse the sleepy war.
The soldiers’ shouts succeed the brazen sounds
And heaven from pole to pole their noise rebounds.
Dryden.
And again, in his Battle of the Bees, Geor., lib. iv. ver. 70: -
- namque morantes
Martius ille aeris rauci canor increpat, et vox
Auditur fractos sonitus imitata tubarum.
With shouts the cowards’ courage they excite,
And martial clangours call them out to fight;
With hoarse alarms the hollow camp rebounds,
That imitate the trumpet’s angry sounds.
Dryden.
Examples of the same figure might be multiplied; but these are sufficient.
Tinkling cymbal - “The cymbal was a concavo-convex plate of brass, the concave
side of which being struck against another plate of the same kind produced a
tinkling, inharmonious sound.” We may understand the apostle thus: “Though I
possessed the knowledge of all languages, and could deliver even the truth of God in
them in the most eloquent manner, and had not a heart full of love to God and man,
producing piety and obedience to the One, and benevolence and beneficence to the
other, doing unto all as I would wish them to do to me were our situations reversed,
my religion is no more to my salvation than the sounds emitted by the brazen

trumpet, or the jingling of the cymbals could contribute intellectual pleasure to the
instruments which produce them; and, in the sight of God, I am of no more moral
worth than those sounds are. I have, it is true, a profession; but, destitute of a heart
filled with love to God and man, producing meekness, gentleness, long-suffering,
etc., I am without the soul and essence of religion.”
I have quoted several passages from heathens of the most cultivated minds in
Greece and Rome to illustrate passages of the sacred writers. I shall now quote one
from an illiterate collier of Paulton, in Somerset; and, as I have named Homer,
Horace, Virgil, and others, I will quote Josiah Gregory, whose mind might be
compared to a diamond of the first water, whose native splendor broke in various
places through its incrustations, but whose brilliancy was not brought out for want
of the hand of the lapidary. Among various energetic sayings of this great,
unlettered man, I remember to have heard the following: “People of little religion
are always noisy; he who has not the love of God and man filling his heart is like an
empty wagon coming violently down a hill: it makes a great noise, because there is
nothing in it.”
2B. Alan Carr, “You may be a great speaker, but that is no substitute for love. o
matter how great your oratory, how beautiful your speech, how brilliant your
rhetoric, without love you are simply a clanging cymbal. Have you ever been to a
cymbal solo? I can assure you it is not very exciting. o matter what you say, nor
how you say it, nor how accurate it may be, without love it is just noise. Without
love, talk truly is cheap. You see, great oratory can move a person's emotions. Great
rhetoric can move a person's mind. A great speech can move a person's will, but
only great love can move a person's heart. Oratory can move one to tears, but only
love can move one to Jesus.”
3. Gill, “Though I speak with the tongues of men,.... That is, of all men, all languages
that men anywhere speak, or have been spoken by them. The number of these is by
some said (i) to be seventy five; but the general opinion of the Jews is, that at the
confusion of languages at Babel, they were seventy; for they say (k), that then
the holy blessed God descended, and seventy angels surrounding the throne of
his glory, and confounded the languages of seventy people, and every nation of the
seventy had their own language and writing, and an angel set over each nation;''
whether this may be the reason, why the tongues of angels are mentioned here with
those of men, let it be considered. Mordecai, they say (l), was skilled in all these
seventy languages, so that when he heard Bigthan and Teresh, who were Tarsians,
talking together in the Tarsian language, he understood them. The same is said (m)
of R. Akiba, R. Joshua, and R. Eliezer; yet, they say (n), that this was one of the
qualifications of the sanhedrim, or of such that sat in that great council, that they
should understand these seventy languages, because they were not to hear causes
from the mouth of an interpreter. It is affirmed (o) of Mithridates, king of Pontus
and Bithynia, that he had twenty five nations under his government, and that he

so well understood, and could speak the language of each nation, as to converse with
men of any of them, without an interpreter. Apollonius Tyaneus (p) pretended to
understand, and speak with the tongues of all men; such a case the apostle supposes
here, whether attained to by learning, industry, and close application, or by an
extraordinary gift of the Spirit, which latter seems to be what he intends; and the
rather he mentions this, and begins with it, because many of the Corinthians were
greatly desirous of it; some that had it not, were dejected on that account; wherefore
to comfort them, the apostle suggests, that the grace of love which they were
possessed of, was abundantly preferable to it; and others that had it were lifted up
with it, and used it either for ostentation or gain, or to make parties, and not to the
edification of their brethren; which showed want of love, and so were no better than
what the apostle hereafter asserts: what he says here and in the following verses, is
in an hypothetical way, supposing such a case, and in his own person, that it might
be the better taken, and envy and ill will be removed: he adds,
and of angels; not that angels have tongues in a proper sense, or speak any vocal
language, in an audible voice, with articulate sounds; for they are spirits immaterial
and incorporeal; though they have an intellectual speech, by which they celebrate
the perfections and praises of God, and can discourse with one another, and
communicate their minds to each other; see Isa_6:3 and which is what the Jews (q)
call,
דיבור הלב , the speech of the heart; and is the speech (they say) ,שהמלאכים מדברים
which the angels speak in their heart; and is the pure language, and more
excellent than other tongues; is pleasant discourse, the secret of the holy seraphim--
and is שיח המלאכים , the talk of angels; who do the will of their Creator in their
hearts, and in their thoughts:''
this is not what the apostle refers to; but rather the speech of angels, when they have
assumed human bodies, and have in them spoke with an audible voice, in articulate
sounds; of which we have many instances, both in the Old Testament and the ew,
wherein they have conversed with divers persons, as Hagar, Abraham, Jacob,
Moses, Manoah and his wife, the Virgin Mary, Zechariah, and others; unless by the
tongues of angels should be meant the most eloquent speech, and most excellent of
languages; or if there can be thought to be any tongue that exceeds that of men,
which, if angels spoke, they would make use of. Just as the face of angels is used, to
express the greatest glory and beauty of the face, or countenance, Act_6:15 and
angels' bread is used for the most excellent food, Psa_78:25. Dr. Lightfoot thinks,
and that not without reason, that the apostle speaks according to the sense and
conceptions of the Jews, who attribute speech and language to angels. They tell us
(r) that R. Jochanan ben Zaccai, who was contemporary with the apostle, and lived
to the destruction of Jerusalem, among other things, he was well versed in,
understood שיחת שדים ושיחת מלאכי שרת , the speech of demons, and the speech of
the ministering angels: and which they take to be the holy tongue, or the Hebrew
language; they observe (s), that

the children of men (by whom I suppose they mean the Israelites) are in three
things like to the ministering angels; they have knowledge as the ministering angels,
and they walk in an erect stature as the ministering angels, ומספרים בלשון הקדש
כמלאכי השרת , and they speak in the holy tongue, as the ministering angels.''
They pretend that the angels do not understand the Syriac language; hence they (t)
advise a man,
never to ask for what he wants in the Syriac language; for (says R. Jochanan)
whoever asks for what he wants in the Syriac language, the ministering angels do
not join with him, for they do not know the Syriac language;''
and yet, in the same page, they say that Gabriel came and taught one the seventy
languages: but let the tongues of angels be what they will, and a man be able to
speak with them ever so well,
and have not charity; by which is meant not giving of alms to the poor, for in
1Co_13:3 this is supposed in the highest degree it can be performed, and yet a man
be destitute of charity; nor a charitable opinion of men as good men, let their
principles and practices be what they will; for this is not true charity, but rather
uncharitableness, and acting the most unkind part to their souls, to consider and
caress them as such, when destruction and ruin are in all their ways; but the grace
of love is here meant, even love to God, and love to Christ, and love to the saints,
which is a grace implanted in regeneration by the Spirit of God; and which, if a
person is destitute of, as he may, who has never so great a share of learning, or
knowledge of the languages, or even the extraordinary gift of speaking with divers
tongues; all his learning is but an empty sound, his eloquence, his diversity of
speech, is but like the man's nightingale, vox praeterea nihil, a voice and
nothing else; or as the apostle here says, supposing it was his own case,
I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal; or rather, the loud, or
high sounding cymbal, as in Psa_150:5 which the Septuagint there render by
κυμβαλοις αλαλαγμου, a phrase of the same signification with this: for not that little
tinkling instrument used by the Heathens is here meant; though what is here said of
the cymbal agrees with that; which made a tinkling noise when shaken, or struck
with anything, or with one against another; and was an hollow vessel of brass, in
form of the herb called navel wort (u); but rather that musical instrument which
bore this name, used in the Jewish worship under the Old Testament; and which,
the Jews (w) say, was an instrument that gave a very great sound; and that the
sound of it was heard as far as Jericho (x), which was some miles from Jerusalem;
they say (y), that the cymbals were two brazen instruments or pieces of brass, which
they struck one against another, and so made a sound. The cymbal was also used in
the worship of Heathen deities, and the allusion here in both the things mentioned,
is either to the tinkling of brass, and the sounding of cymbals in the worship of idols
(z); which were mere empty sounds, and of no avail, as is a man's speaking with
divers tongues, destitute of the grace of love; or to the confused clamours and noises

made upon going to battle, just upon the onset, by drums and cymbals, and ηχειοις
χαλκοις, hollow sounding pieces of brass; as appears from Polytenus, Plutarch,
Appianus and others (a); to which confused noises the apostle compares the most
eloquent speech without love. The Greeks had a play they used at feasts, I will not
say the allusion is to it here, but leave it to be though of, which they call
Cottabisis; when, the liquor that was left, they cast into cups of brass, and such
whose liquor made the greatest sound in the cup, fancied himself to be loved again,
by the person he loved (b): sounding brass and tinkling cymbals are inanimate
things, things without life, as all such persons are destitute of spiritual life, who are
devoid of the grace of love; and though they, by an extraordinary gift, and under a
divine impulse, speak with divers tongues, they are but like hollow vessels of brass,
and sounding cymbals, which only make a noise when they are stricken, and what
they give is a mere empty sound, which is of no profit to themselves; they cannot
hear, nor be delighted with it, but are rather hurt, being worn out thereby; nor of
no great advantage to others, unless they give a musical sound, and that only
delights the ear, but neither feeds nor clothes the body; of such little use and profit
are men, speaking with tongues destitute of the grace of love, either to themselves or
others.
4. Henry, “Here the apostle shows what more excellent way he meant, or had in
view, in the close of the former chapter, namely, charity, or, as it is commonly
elsewhere rendered, love - agapē: not what is meant by charity in our common use of
the word, which most men understand of alms - giving, but love in its fullest and
most extensive meaning, true love to God and man, a benevolent disposition of mind
towards our fellow-christians, growing out of sincere and fervent devotion to God.
This living principle of all duty and obedience is the more excellent way of which the
apostle speaks, preferable to all gifts. ay, without this the most glorious gifts are
nothing, of no account to us, of no esteem in the sight of God. He specifies, 1. The
gift of tongues: Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not
charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal, 1Co_13:1. Could a man
speak all the languages on earth, and that with the greatest propriety, elegance, and
fluency, could he talk like an angel, and yet be without charity, it would be all empty
noise, mere unharmonious and useless sound, that would neither profit nor delight.
It is not talking freely, nor finely, nor learnedly, of the things of God, that will save
ourselves, or profit others, if we are destitute of holy love. It is the charitable heart,
not the voluble tongue, that is acceptable with God. The apostle specifies first this
gift because hereupon the Corinthians seemed chiefly to value themselves and
despise their brethren.
5. Jamison, “1Co_13:1-13. Charity or love superior to all gifts.
The ew Testament psalm of love, as the forty-fifth Psalm (see Psa_45:1, title) and
the Song of Solomon in the Old Testament.
tongues — from these he ascends to “prophecy” (1Co_13:2); then, to “faith”; then
to benevolent and self-sacrificing deeds: a climax. He does not except even himself,

and so passes from addressing them (“unto you,” 1Co_12:31) to putting the case in
his own person, “Though I,” etc.
speak with the tongues — with the eloquence which was so much admired at
Corinth (for example, Apollos, Act_18:24; compare 1Co_1:12; 1Co_3:21, 1Co_3:22),
and with the command of various languages, which some at Corinth abused to
purposes of mere ostentation (1Co_14:2, etc.).
of angels — higher than men, and therefore, it is to be supposed, speaking a more
exalted language.
charity — the principle of the ordinary and more important gifts of the Spirit, as
contrasted with the extraordinary gifts (1Co_12:1-31).
sounding ... tinkling — sound without soul or feeling: such are “tongues” without
charity.
cymbal — Two kinds are noticed (Psa_150:5), the loud or clear, and the high-sounding
one: hand cymbals and finger cymbals, or castanets. The sound is sharp
and piercing.
6. Barclay, “Paul begins by declaring that a man may possess any spiritual gift, but
if it is unaccompanied by love it is useless.
(i) He may have the gift of tongues. A characteristic of heathen worship, especially
the worship of Dionysus and Cybele, was the clanging of cymbals and the braying of
trumpets. Even the coveted gift of tongues was no better than the uproar of heathen
worship if love was absent.
(ii) He may have the gift of prophecy. We have already seen that prophecy
corresponds most closely to preaching. There are two kinds of preachers. There is
the preacher whose one aim is to save the souls of his people and who woos them
with the accents of love. Of no one was that more true than of Paul himself. Myers,
in his poem St. Paul, draws the picture of him looking at the Christless world,
Then with a thrill the intolerable craving Shivers throughout me like a trumpet
call-- O to save these--to perish for their saving-- Die for their lives, be offered for
them all.
On the other hand there is the preacher who dangles his hearers over the flames of
hell and gives the impression that he would rejoice in their damnation as much as in
their salvation. It is told that Sir George Adam Smith once asked a member of the
Greek Church, which has suffered much at the hands of Islam, why God had
created so many Mohammedans, and received the answer, To fill up hell. The
preaching which is all threat and no love may terrify but it will not save.

2. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all
mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith
that can move mountains, but have not love, I am
nothing.
1. o one was more qualified to speak than Paul, for he had many of the gifts, and
yet he claims he would be nothing with all his gifts without the love that makes them
tools of God’s grace in the world. When love is present people can overlook the
absence of gifts, but when love is absent the other gifts are not enough to satisfy.
The rich young ruler had so much going for him, but Jesus said that he lacked one
thing, and that one thing was love enough to sacrifice his materialistic life style for
the good of others. One thing lacking is enough to spoil the value of dozens of good
qualities. One thing is enough to change all, or to defeat all. Love is only one thing,
but it is the one thing that gives value to all other things. One is enough if you have
it, but it is also the fact that many things are not enough without this one thing. Roy
Laurin wrote, “Skill in knowing what is going to happen in the future is not as
desirable as love in the moments of the present.” He says that not to love is not to
live, for it makes all other gifts a sham and pretense.
1B. Barnes, “And though I have the gift of prophecy - See the note at 1Co_12:10;
note at 1Co_14:1.
And understand all mysteries - On the meaning of the word “mystery” see note,
1Co_2:7. This passage proves that it was one part of the prophetic office, as referred
to here, to be able to understand and explain the “mysteries” of religion; that is, the
things that were before unknown, or unrevealed. It does not refer to the prediction
of future events, but to the great and deep truths connected with religion; the things
that were unexplained in the old economy, the meaning of types and emblems; and
the obscure portions of the plan of redemption. All these might be plain enough if
they were revealed; but there were many things connected with religion which God
had not chosen to reveal to people.
And all knowledge - See the note at 1Co_12:8. Though I knew every thing.
Though I were acquainted fully with all the doctrines of religion; and were with all
sciences and arts.
And though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains - Thould I should
have the highest kind of faith. This is referred to by the Saviour Mat_17:20, as the
highest kind of faith; and Paul here had this fact doubtless in his eye.
I am nothing - All would be of no value. it would not save me. I should still be an
unredeemed, unpardoned sinner. I should do good to no one; I should answer none
of the great purposes which God has designed; I should not by all this secure my

salvation. All would be in vain in regard to the great purpose of my existence. one
of these things could be placed before God as a ground of acceptance in the Day of
Judgment. Unless I should have love, I should still be lost. A somewhat similar idea
is expressed by the Saviour, in regard to the Day of Judgment, in Mat_7:22-23,
“Many will say unto me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy
name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful
works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you depart from me, ye that
work iniquity.”
1C. Biblical Illustrator, “All gifts are of little worth if not directed and
controlled by love (vers. 1-3) Paul takes the gifis upon which the Corinthians
prided themselves, and affirms that all these are useless if love does not regulate
their operations. 1. One man noted for his eloquence. But suppose he uses his
gift for his own advantage, or to stir up the passions of his audience! 2. Another
has vast knowledge, but what is the use of it if he has not love to communicate it,
and that in the best way ? It is one of the most dangerous gifts a man can possess. “
1D. Tozer wrote, The tragedy of unlovely orthodoxy, of unbeautiful Christians, is
without doubt one of the major tragedies of the day. It is my conviction that
unlovely Christians have done more to turn people away from Christ than all the
liberalism in the world.
1E. David Guzik “A man with faith can move great mountains; but he will set them
down right in the path of somebody else – or right on somebody else - if he doesn’t
have love!”
2. Clarke, “And though I have the gift of prophecy - Though I should have received
from God the knowledge of future events, so that I could correctly foretell what is
coming to pass in the world and in the Church: - And understand all mysteries -
The meaning of all the types and figures in the Old Testament, and all the
unexplored secrets of nature; and all knowledge - every human art and science; and
though I have all faith - such miraculous faith as would enable me even to remove
mountains; or had such powerful discernment in sacred things that I could solve the
greatest difficulties, see the note on Mat_21:21, and have not charity - this love to
God and man, as the principle and motive of all my conduct, the characteristics of
which are given in the following verses; I am nothing - nothing in myself, nothing in
the sight of God, nothing in the Church, and good for nothing to mankind. Balaam,
and several others not under the influence of this love of God, prophesied; and we
daily see many men, who are profound scholars, and well skilled in arts and
sciences, and yet not only careless about religion but downright infidels! It does not
require the tongue of the inspired to say that these men, in the sight of God, are
nothing; nor can their literary or scientific acquisitions give them a passport to
glory.
3. Gill, “And though I have the gift of prophecy,.... Either of foretelling future
events, as Balaam, who foretold many things concerning the Messiah and the people

of Israel, and yet had no true love for either; and Caiaphas, who was high priest the
year Christ suffered, and prophesied of his death, and was himself concerned in it,
being a bitter enemy to him; or of explaining the prophecies of the Old Testament,
by virtue of an extraordinary gift which some persons had; or of the ordinary
preaching of the word, which is sometimes expressed by prophesying, which gift
some have had, and yet not the grace of God; see Phi_1:15
and understand all mysteries; either the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, the
mysterious doctrines of the Gospel; such as the trinity of persons in the Godhead,
the incarnation of Christ, the unity of the two natures, human and divine, in him,
eternal predestination, the doctrines of regeneration, justification, satisfaction, and
the resurrection of the dead; all which a man may have a speculative understanding
of, and be without love to God or Christ, or to his people: or else the mystical sense
of the types, figures, and shadows of the old law; as the meaning of the passover,
brazen serpent, and the rock in the wilderness, the tabernacle, temple, sacrifices,
and all things appertaining thereunto. The Jews give us an instance (c) of one who
was no lover of Christ, and lived in the times of the apostle; R. Jochanan ben Zaccai,
of whom they boast, and who they say was the least of the disciples of Hillell, and yet
perfectly understood the Scripture, the Misna, the Gemara, the traditions, the
allegorical interpretations, the niceties of the law, and the subtleties of the Scribes,
the lighter and weightier matters of the law (or the arguments from the greater to
the lesser, and vice versa), the arguments taken from a parity of reason, the
revolution of the sun and moon, rules of interpretation by gematry, parables, c.''
The apostle proceeds,
and all knowledge; of things natural, as Solomon had; of the heavens, and the stars
thereof, of the earth and sea, and all things therein, and appertaining thereunto; of
all languages, arts, and sciences; of things divine, as a speculative knowledge of God,
and the perfections of his nature, of Christ, his person and offices, of the Gospel,
and the doctrines of it:
and though I have all faith; not true, special, saving faith, or that faith in Christ,
which has salvation connected with it; for a man cannot have that, and be nothing;
such an one shall be certainly saved; and besides, this cannot be without love, and
therefore not to be supposed: but all historical faith, an assent to everything that is
true, to all that is contained in the Scriptures, whether natural, civil, moral, or
evangelical; to all that is contained in the law, or in the Gospel; that faith which
believes everything: so the Jews (d) say, what is faith? that in which is found כל
מהימנותא , all faith; or rather the faith of miracles is meant, both of believing and
doing all sorts of miracles, one of which is mentioned;
so that I could remove mountains; meaning either literally, a power of removing
mountains from one place to another, referring to Mat_17:20 so Gregory of
eocaesarea, called Thaumaturgus, the wonder worker, from the miracles done

by him, is said (e) to remove a mountain, to make more room for building a church;
but whether fact, is a question; or this may be understood figuratively, see Rev_8:8
for doing things very difficult and wonderful, and almost incredible. The Jews used
to call their learned and profound doctors, such as could solve difficulties, and do
wondrous things, by the name of mountains, or removers of mountains; thus (f).
they called Rab Joseph, Sinai, because he was very expert in the Talmudic
doctrines, and Rabbah bar achmani, עוקר הרים , a rooter up of mountains;
because he was exceeding acute in subtle disputations.''
Says Rabba (g) to his disciples,
lo, I am ready to return an answer smartly to everyone that shall ask me, as Ben
Azzai, who expounded in the streets of Tiberias; and there was not in his days such
a עוקר הרים , rooter up of mountains, as he.''
Again (h),
Ula saw Resh Lekish in the school, as if עוקר הרים , he was rooting up the
mountains, and grinding them together; says Rabenu, does not everybody see R.
Meir in the school, as if he was rooting up the mountains of mountains, and
grinding them together?''
They (i) elsewhere dispute which is the most honourable to be called, Sinai or a
remover of mountains;
one says Sinai is the more excellent name; another says the rooter up of
mountains is the more excellent; Rab Joseph is Sinai, and Rabbah the remover of
mountains;''
the gloss says the former is so called,
because the Misnic laws and their explications were ordered by him, as if they had
been given on Mount Sinai,''
though he was not so acute as Rabbah; and the latter was called the rooter up of
mountains, because
he was sharp and subtle in the law;''
once more on those words relating to Issachar, Gen_49:15 and bowed his shoulder
to bear, it is observed (k); that
this intimates that he was wise in wisdom, מפרק הרים , a breaker of the mountains,
a shatterer in pieces of the rocks of dissensions and division various ways; as it is
said, Jer_23:29 is not my word like as a fire, saith the Lord, and like a hammer

that breaketh the rock in pieces? So a wise man, by the sharpness of his wit, breaks
the mountains of difficulties, and divides them by the words of his mouth: hence
they used to call the wise men by the names of Sinai, and a rooter of mountains;
because they beat and brake the rocks in pieces, the traditions that are difficult and
deep.''
The phrase is also used of removing difficulties in a civil and political sense, as well
as in a theological one (l): but let a man be able to do ever such great things, yet if he
has not charity, love to God, to Christ and to his people, he is nothing at all; as
the apostle says of himself, supposing it was his own case,
I am nothing; not nothing as a man, nor nothing as a gifted man, still he would be a
man, and a man of gifts; nor does the apostle say, that his gifts were nothing, that
the gift of prophecy was nothing, or the gift of understanding mysteries nothing, or
the gift of knowledge nothing, or the gift of doing miracles nothing, for these are all
something, and very great things too, and yet a man in whom the grace of love is
wanting, is nothing himself with all these; he is nothing in the account of God, of no
esteem with him; he is nothing as a believer in Christ, nor nothing as a Christian.
This is also a Jewish way of speaking; for they say (m),
as a bride that is to be adorned with four and twenty ornaments, if she wants
anyone of them, אינה כלום , she is nothing; so a disciple of a wise man ought to be
used to the twenty four books (of the Scripture), and if he is wanting in one of them,
אינו כלום , he is nothing.''
4. Jamison, “mysteries — (Rom_11:25; Rom_16:25). Mysteries refer to the deep
counsels of God hitherto secret, but now revealed to His saints. Knowledge, to truths
long known.
faith ... remove mountains — (Mat_17:20; Mat_21:21). The practical power of the
will elevated by faith [eander]; confidence in God that the miraculous result will
surely follow the exercise of the will at the secret impulse of His Spirit. Without
“love” prophecy, knowledge, and faith, are not what they seem (compare 1Co_8:1,
1Co_8:2; Mat_7:22; Jam_2:14; compare 1Co_13:8), and so fail of the heavenly
reward (Mat_6:2). Thus Paul, who teaches justification by faith only (Rom_3:4,
Rom_3:5; Gal_2:16; Gal_3:7-14), is shown to agree with James, who teaches
(Jam_2:24) “by works” (that is, by LOVE, which is the “spirit” of faith, Jam_2:26)
a man is justified, “and not by faith only.”
5. Henry, “Prophecy, and the understanding of mysteries, and all knowledge. This
without charity is as nothing, 1Co_13:2. Had a man ever so clear an understanding
of the prophecies and types under the old dispensation, ever so accurate a
knowledge of the doctrines of Christianity, nay, and this by inspiration, from the
infallible dictates and illumination of the Spirit of God, without charity he would be
nothing; all this would stand him in no stead. ote, A clear and deep head is of no
signification, without a benevolent and charitable heart. It is not great knowledge
that God sets a value upon, but true and hearty devotion and love. 3. Miraculous

faith, the faith of miracles, or the faith by which persons were enabled to work
miracles: Had I all faith (the utmost degree of this kind of faith), that I could remove
mountains (or say to them, “Go hence into the midst of the sea,” and have my
command obeyed, Mar_11:23), and had no charity, I am nothing. The most wonder-working
faith, to which nothing is in a manner impossible, is itself nothing without
charity. Moving mountains is a great achievement in the account of men; but one
dram of charity is, in God's account, of much greater worth than all the faith of this
sort in the world. Those may do many wondrous works in Christ's name whom yet
he will disown, and bid depart from him, as workers of iniquity, Mat_7:22,
Mat_7:23. Saving faith is ever in conjunction with charity, but the faith of miracles
may be without it.
5B. Coffman, “Although this refers to a miraculous gift, faith is never to be viewed
as appearing in various varieties, being of one kind only. In all the word of God,
there is no mention of several kinds, or even two kinds of faith. It is always the
AMOUT OF FAITH which is determinative. True to that fact, Paul is not here
speaking of some special kind of faith, but of all faith, meaning the superlative
AMOUT, not some special kind. o greater misunderstanding exists among
religious people today than the notion that there is any such thing as saving faith,
understanding it as a special quality or variety of faith that inevitably procures
salvation.
Paul's words here are a sufficient refutation of the popular heresy regarding faith
alone or saving faith. All faith cannot mean anything less than faith in its
superlative degree (degrees of faith being often mentioned ... little faith ... great
faith ... etc.); and if certain kinds of faith contrary to all Scripture, should be
supposed as existing, there would be no way to exclude them from being included in
Paul's sweeping words all faith. Significantly, not even all faith can avail any
man of salvation unless his heart is filled with love of man and of God. This obvious
truth has resulted in some of the exegetes placing a false construction upon love
as Paul used it here, making it to mean God's love of men, not their love of God.
Throughout this chapter it will be observed that it is love of humanity as a reflection
of the love which Christians have for God which is being discussed.
All faith so as to remove mountains...While true enough that removing mountains
was a well-known Jewish metaphor for solving difficult problems (see Matthew
17:20; Luke 17:6,; 17:6, especially the comment in my Commentary on Luke, pp ), it
is clearly the miraculous manifestation of faith that is meant here. As Wesley said,
This means the highest degree of miracle-working faith.
Judas Iscariot was cited by David Lipscomb as being an example of faith to perform
miracles, but with no love of Christ. Judas had faith to work miracles (Matthew
10:1); but he did not possess love, betrayed the Lord, and went to his own place.
The miraculous gift of prophecy belonged to Balaam, but his having love neither of
God or Israel caused his ruin. Caiaphas as God's high priest uttered prophecy; but
his loveless heart made him an enemy of God.”

6. Barclay, “(iii) He may have the gift of intellectual knowledge. The permanent
danger of intellectual eminence is intellectual snobbery. The man who is learned
runs the grave danger of developing the spirit of contempt. Only a knowledge whose
cold detachment has been kindled by the fire of love can really save men.
(iv) He may have a passionate faith. There are times when faith can be cruel. There
was a man who visited his doctor and was informed that his heart was tired and he
must rest. He telephoned his employer, a notable Christian figure, with the news,
only to receive the answer, I have an inward strength which enables me to carry
on. These were the words of faith but a faith which knew no love and was therefore
a hurting thing.
7. We say you are what you eat, or you are what you read, or you are what you
think, but the highest level of this idea is you are what you love.
7B. Quayle, Life's garden was given to grow love's holy flower. Love is the soil in
which life is rooted. Out of love comes the flower and fruit of life. Pull love out and
the plant of life will wither and die. Love and life go together and if you lose love you
lose life.
7C. The night has a thousand eyes, and the day but one,
But the light of the whole world dies with the setting sun!
The mind has a thousand eyes and the heart but one,
but the light of the whole life dies when love is done.
7D. Jonathan Edwards said, Love is the life and soul of all religion, without which
all things that wear the name of virtue are empty and vain. He points out also that
the spirit of love for God and man is one spirit. You do not get love for God and
then another love for man. It is one love. If you truly love God you will love man.
8. John MacArthur “What does it mean to understand all mysteries? Well, first
let's define the term mysteries. This term, which is used over thirty times in
Scripture, is always used in a technical way to refer to a divine truth revealed in the
ew Testament. In other words, a mystery in the Bible is something hidden in the
past which is now revealed. Some of these ew Testament mysteries, for example,
are:
1) The Mystery of God in Human Flesh (Col. 2:2-3,9; 1 Tim. 3:16)
2) The Mystery of Christ in Us (Col. 1:26-27)
3) The Mystery of the Church as a Body (Eph. 3:3-6,9)
4) The Mystery of Iniquity (2 Thess. 2:7)
There are many things in the ew Testament that are referred to as mysteries--
something that was hidden and now is revealed. And we are the ones who know
these sacred secrets of God. In Matthew 13:11, Jesus called these secrets mysteries

of the kingdom of heaven. And according to Matthew 11:25, He said that these
things were hidden...from the wise and prudent, and...revealed...unto babes.
Furthermore, a mystery is a sacred secret that is related to God's redemptive plan
and His ultimate plan for history.
So, God has certain redemptive truths which He has revealed to us. But there are
others that He hasn't revealed. Let's assume, though, that you knew every
redemptive fact and could perfectly correlate every redemptive truth. Let's also
assume that you knew every single fact about God's ultimate purpose for time and
eternity, and could correlate all of those facts. If you knew all of that and didn't
have love, you would still be nothing.”
“So, let's say that you knew every secret relative to redemption and God's plan for
the ages, and every single fact in existence in the universe. If you knew all of that
and didn't have love, how would you rate on a scale of one to five? Well, you say,
I'd be at least a two or a three. o, you'd be zero. You wouldn't even be a one.
Why? Because love is important. Of course, you can't know all of those things.
That's why Paul uses the Greek word ean with the subjunctive case. It's all
hypothetical. But even if you could understand all mysteries and have all
knowledge, without love you'd be a zero.”
3. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender
my body to the flames,[b] but have not love, I gain
nothing.
1. Barnes, “And though I bestow - The Greek word used here ψωμίσω psōmisō,
from ψάω psaō, to break off) meant properly to break off, and distribute in small
portions; to feed by morsels; and may be applicable here to distributing one’s
property in small portions. Charity or alms to the poor, was usually distributed at
one’s gate Luk_16:20, or in some public place. Of course, if property was
distributed in this manner, many more would be benefitted than if all were given to
one person. There would be many more to be thankful, and to celebrate one’s
praises. This was regarded as a great virtue; and was often performed in a most
ostentatious manner. It was a gratification to wealthy men who desired the praise of
being benevolent, that many of the poor flocked daily to their houses to be fed; and
against this desire of distinction, the Saviour directed some of his severest reproofs;
see Mat_6:1-4. To make the case as strong as possible, Paul says that if all that a
man had were dealt out in this way, in small portions, so as to benefit as many as
possible, and yet were not attended “with true love toward God and toward man,” it
would be all false, hollow, hypocritical, and really of no value in regard to his own

salvation. It would profit nothing. It would not be such an act as God would
approve; it would be no evidence that the soul would be saved. Though good might
be done to others, yet where the “motive” was wrong, it could not meet with the
divine approbation, or be connected with his favor.
And though I give my body to be burned - Evidently as a martyr, or a witness to
the truth of religion. Though I should be willing to lay down my life in the most
painful manner, and have not charity, it would profit me nothing. Many of the
ancient prophets were called to suffer martyrdom, though there is no evidence that
any of them were burned to death as martyrs. Shadrach, Meshech, and Abednego
were indeed thrown into a fiery furnace, because they were worshippers of the true
God; but they were not consumed in the flame, Dan_3:19-26; compare Heb_11:34.
Though Christians were early persecuted, yet there is no evidence that they were
burned as martyrs as early as this Epistle was written. ero is the first who is
believed to have committed this horrible act; and under his reign, and during the
persecution which he excited, Christians were covered with pitch, and set on fire to
illuminate his gardens. It is possible that some Christians had been put to death in
this manner when Paul wrote this Epistle; but it is more probable that he refers to
this as “the most awful kind of death,” rather than as anything which had really
happened. Subsequently, however, as all know, this was often done, and thousands,
and perhaps tens of thousands, of Christians have been called to evince their
attachment to religion in the flames.
And have not charity - Have no love to God, or to people; have no true piety. If I
do it from any selfish or sinister motive; if I do it from fanaticism, obstinacy, or
vain-glory; if I am deceived in regard to my character, and have never been born
again. It is not necessary to an explanation of this passage to suppose that this ever
had been done, for the apostle only puts a supposable case. There is reason,
however, to think that it has been done frequently; and that when the desire of
martyrdom became the popular passion, and was believed to be connected infallibly
with heaven, not a few have been willing to give themselves to the flames who never
knew anything of love to God or true piety. Grotius mentions the instance of
Calanus, and of Peregrinus the philosopher, who did it. Although this was not the
common mode of martyrdom in the time of Paul, and although it was then perhaps
unknown, it is remarkable that he should have referred to that which in subsequent
times became the common mode of death on account of religion. In his time, and
before, the common mode was by stoning, by the sword, or by crucifixion.
Subsequently, however, all these were laid aside, and burning became the common
way in which martyrs suffered. So it was, extensively, under ero: and so it was,
exclusively, under the Inquisition; and so it was in the persecutions in England in
the time of Mary. Paul seems to have been directed to specify this rather than
stoning, the sword, or crucifixion, in order that, in subsequent times, martyrs might
be led to examine themselves, and to see whether they were actuated by true love to
God in being willing to be consumed in the flames.
It profiteth me nothing - If there is no true piety, there can be no benefit in this to
my soul. It will not save me. If I have no true love to God, I must perish, after all.
“Love,” therefore, is more valuable and precious than all these endowments.
othing can supply its place; nothing can be connected with salvation without it.

2. Clarke, “And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor - This is a proof that
charity, in our sense of the word, is not what the apostle means; for surely
almsgiving can go no farther than to give up all that a man possesses in order to
relieve the wants of others. The word ψωμιζω, which we translate to feed the poor,
signifies to divide into morsels, and put into the mouth; which implies carefulness
and tenderness in applying the bounty thus freely given.
And though I give my body to be burned - Ἱνα καυθησομαι· Mr. Wakefield
renders this clause thus:
1. And though I give up my body so as to have cause of boasting: in vindication
of which he, first, refers to Dan_3:28; Act_15:26; Rom_8:32; Phi_1:20.
2. He says that there is no such word as καυθησωμαι.
3. That καυχησωμαι, that I may boast, is the reading of the Ethiopic and Coptic,
and he might have added of the Codex Alexandrinus; several Greek and Latin
MSS. referred to by St. Jerome; of Ephraim; and of St. Jerome himself, who
translates the passage thus: Si tradidero corpus meum ut glorier: i.e. “If I
deliver up my body that I may glory, or have cause of boasting.”
4. He adds that burning, though a common punishment in after times, was not
prevalent when this epistle was written.
Some of the foreign critics, particularly Schulzius, translate it thus: Si traderem
corpus, ut mihi stigma inureretur: “If I should deliver up my body to receive a stigma
with a hot iron;” which may mean, If I should, in order to redeem another, willingly
give up myself to slavery, and receive the mark of my owner, by having my flesh
stamped with a hot iron, and have not love, as before specified, it profits me nothing.
This gives a good sense; but will the passage bear it? In the MSS. there are several
various readings, which plainly show the original copyists scarcely knew what to
make of the word καυθησωμαι, which they found in the text generally. The various
readings are, καυθησομαι, which Griesbach seems to prefer; καυθησεται; and
καυθῃ; all of which give little variation of meaning. Which should be preferred I can
scarcely venture to say. If we take the commonly received word, it states a possible
case; a man may be so obstinately wedded to a particular opinion, demonstrably
false in itself, as to give up his body to be burned in its defense, as was literally the
case with Vanini, who, for his obstinate atheism, was burnt alive at Paris, February
19th, a.d. 1619. In such a cause, his giving his body to be burned certainly profited
him nothing.
“We may observe,” says Dr. Lightfoot, “in those instances which are compared
with charity, and are as good as nothing if charity be absent, that the apostle
mentions those which were of the noblest esteem in the Jewish nation; and also that
the most precious things that could be named by them were compared with this
more precious, and were of no account in comparison of it.
“1. To speak with the tongues of men, among the Jewish interpreters, means, to
speak the languages of the seventy nations. To the praise of Mordecai, they say
that he understood all those languages; and they require that the fathers of the

Sanhedrin should be skilled in many languages that they may not be obliged to
hear any thing by an interpreter. Maim. in Sanh., c. 2.
“2. To speak with the tongues of angels, they thought to be not only an excellent
gift, but to be possible; and highly extol Jochanan ben Zaccai because he
understood them: see the note on 1Co_13:1.
“3. To know all mysteries and all knowledge was not only prized but affected by
them. Of Hillel, the elder, they say he had eighty disciples: thirty who were
worthy to have the Holy Spirit dwell upon them, as it did upon Moses; thirty
who were worthy that the sun should stop his course for them, as it did for
Joshua; and there were twenty between both. The greatest of all was Jonathan
ben Uzziel; the least was Jochanan ben Zaccai. He omitted not (i.e. perfectly
understood) the Scripture, the Mishna, the Gemara, the idiotisms of the law,
and the scribes, traditions, illustrations, comparisons, equalities, gematries,
parables, etc.
“4. The moving or rooting up of mountains, which among them signified the
removing of the greatest difficulties, especially from the sacred text, they
considered also a high and glorious attainment: see the note on Mat_21:21.
And of his salvation, who had it, they could not have formed the slightest
doubt. But the apostle says, a man might have and enjoy all those gifts, etc.,
and be nothing in himself, and be nothing profited by them.”
The reader will consider that the charity or love, concerning which the apostle
speaks, is that which is described from 1Co_13:4-7, inclusive: it is not left to the
conjectures of men to find it out. What the apostle means is generally allowed to be
true religion; but if he had not described it, this true religion would have been as
various as the parties are who suppose they have it. Let the reader also observe that,
not only the things which are in the highest repute among the Jews, but the things
which are in the highest repute among Christians and Gentiles are those which the
apostle shows to be of no use, if the love hereafter described be wanting. And yet,
who can suppose that the man already described can be destitute of true religion, as
he must be under an especial influence of God; else, how,
1st, could he speak all the languages of men? for this was allowed to be one of the
extraordinary gifts of God’s Spirit.
2. He must have Divine teaching to know the language of angels, and thus to get
acquainted with the economy of the invisible world.
3. Without immediate influence from God he could not be a prophet, and predict
future events.
4. Without this he could not understand all the mysteries of the Divine word, nor
those of Providence.
5. All knowledge, suppose this to be confined to human arts and sciences, could
not be acquired without especial assistance.
6. And without the most powerful and extraordinary assistance, he could not
have a faith that could remove mountains, or miraculous faith of any kind:
and the apostle supposes that a man might have all these six things, and not

48648713 i-corinthians-13-commentary

48648713 i-corinthians-13-commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to 48648713 i-corinthians-13-commentary

Similar to 48648713 i-corinthians-13-commentary (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

48648713 i-corinthians-13-commentary