Summary: Lets work together as servants, building on the one foundation, Jesus Christ, so as to build up the church in unity according to God’s wisdom, not human wisdom.
The Corinthians self-image was of a spiritually mature congregation, endowed with all the spiritual gifts they needed, well taught and self-sufficient. In fact they were quite similar to many churches today, particularly those of an evangelical persuasion, let me say. They thought their learning and their experience of the gifts of God made them better than others. But as Paul looks at them he says "Mature? I think not! Spiritual? No! Not spiritual, fleshly."
1-3 Adults or infants
You could say they’re suffering from what you might call an adolescence syndrome. They think they’re mature, and in some respects they are, but in other respects they’re still acting like children. What they don’t realise is that mere lapse of time doesn’t bring maturity whether in the secular or the Christian world. Maturity has more to it than just age or experience or education. It has to do with an attitude to life, with an ability to deal with the real world, to accept the limitations of life, the variety of gifts that people have. And that’s how he knows that they’re not yet mature as Christians.
Look at v3: there’s quarreling & jealousy among them. How can they say they’re spiritually mature if they show that sort of worldly immaturity? Rather than being directed by love for one another they’re driven by competitiveness. They’re constantly comparing one with another to see who’s the best, who’s the smartest, who’s got the right answers, or the best pedigree.
And of course the major issue in this divisiveness is the issue of leadership. They each have their favourite guru that they place on a pedestal. It’s amazing how little we’ve changed isn’t it? They may not have had TV or the mass media that we have today, but they still had their favourite stars. So what’s wrong with them having their favourite guru? Why is this a sign of immaturity?
4-9 Leaders or servants?
The problem is that this view of leadership comes from the world, not from God.
The world’s view of leadership is that the leader is the one who gives directions, who sets the agenda, who determines what’s important and what’s not. He or she is the most important person in the organisation. They’re the ones to be emulated. That’s why big companies pay their CEOs million dollar pay packages. Because without them their company will flounder. And of course that’s why eyebrows are raised when those CEOs still get paid even if their company does flounder. But that’s another discussion.
But this isn’t big business. This is the church we’re talking about, and the criteria are different. Mind you, we need to be careful here. We’ll see later that he isn’t saying we don’t need leaders, or that the apostles or the preachers of the gospel don’t have a place in setting the direction of the church. But the problem he’s addressing here is the status that these leaders are being given that seems to set them above even Jesus Christ.
So he asks what is Paul, what is Apollos? Not who, notice, but what? You see, this isn’t about personalities, it’s about function, gifting. What are they there for? Well, in the Christian economy they’re there as servants. In fact he uses 2 metaphors from everyday life to illustrate what he’s saying: one from agriculture and one from architecture.