Charles Ellicott Commentary 1 Corinthians 2

And I.—The Apostle now proceeds to show how he personally, in both the matter and manner of his teaching at Corinth, had acted in accordance with those great principles which he has already explained as God’s method. The testimony of God is St. Paul’s testimony concerning God in Christ (1 Corinthians 1:6; 2 Timothy 1:8).

I determined not to know.—It is better understood as, I did not determine to know. The only subject of teaching about which the Apostle had firmly resolved in his mind when coming to Corinth was preaching Christ, and Him as crucified. Here we have a statement of what was always the subject matter of apostolic teaching.

St. Paul did not dwell on the miraculous in the life of Christ, which would have pandered to the Jewish longing for a “sign”; nor did he put forward elaborate “theories” of the gospel, which would have been a concession to the Greek’s longing for “wisdom”: but he preached a personal Christ, and especially dwelt on the fact that He had been crucified (1 Corinthians 1:17; 1 Corinthians 1:23; Galatians 6:14; Philippians 2:8).

We can scarcely realize now what a stumbling block the preaching of a crucified Christ must have been to Jews and Greeks. It is equally difficult to grasp the enormous temptation that early teachers would naturally have felt to keep the cross in the background, or the sublime and confident faith that must have strengthened St. Paul to make it the central fact of all his teaching.

For us, the cross is illuminated with the glories of eighteen centuries of civilization and consecrated with the memory of all that is best and noblest in the history of Christendom. In that era, however, to every Jew and to every Gentile, it conveyed only one idea: that of the most revolting and degrading punishment.

Remembering this fact enables us to realize how uncompromising the Apostles’ teaching was—how it never “accommodated itself” to any existing desire or prejudice. This surely is significant evidence of the divine origin of the religion whose heralds the Apostles were!

And I was with you.—To show that the real force of his teaching lay in its subject matter, and not in any power with which he may have proclaimed the gospel, the Apostle now elaborates on his own physical weakness. The weakness and fear and trembling of which St. Paul speaks here likely included a large element of that self-distrust which so noble and sensitive a nature would feel in the fulfillment of such an exalted mission as the preaching of the Cross.

I cannot think, however, that the allusion is only to that. There is, I believe, a reference also to what we may call a physical apprehension of danger. The bravest are not those who do not experience any sensation of fear, but rather those who are keenly aware of danger, who have an instinctive shrinking from it, and yet eventually by their moral strength conquer this dread. Traces of this element in St. Paul’s character are found in several places; for example, in Acts 18:9, when the Lord encouraged him as he was laboring in Corinth with the hopeful words, Be not afraid; again in Acts 23:11, when, after the terrible scene before Ananias had depressed him, the Lord was with him to strengthen him, Be of good cheer, Paul; and in Acts 27:24, when the angel of the Lord appeared to him amid the storm and shipwreck, Fear not, Paul.

And my speech.—The result that necessarily followed from this weakness and trembling was that neither his “speech” (i.e., the style of his teaching) nor his “preaching” (i.e., the subject matter of his teaching) was of such a kind as to appeal to the natural tastes of the Corinthians.

Demonstration of the Spirit.—The Apostle’s demonstration of the truth of the gospel was the result of no human art or skill, but came from the Spirit and power of God, and therefore the Corinthians could glory in no human teacher, but only in the power of God, which was the true source of the success of the gospel among them.

Howbeit we speak wisdom.—Nevertheless, there is a wisdom in the gospel. The assertion is in Greek a more striking contrast to 1 Corinthians 2:4 than appears in English. In the original (1 Corinthians 2:4), the word is “wisdom,” and not “man’s wisdom,” as in English. Thus, the statement here is a verbal contradiction of that in 1 Corinthians 2:4. In using the plural “we,” Saint Paul implies that he did not stand alone among the Apostles in the method of his teaching.

Them that are perfect—that is, those who are grown up, and not “babes” (1 Corinthians 3:1; see also 1 Corinthians 14:20). The “wisdom” of the gospel is that deep spiritual truth which only those whose spiritual natures have been trained and cultivated were capable of understanding. This “wisdom,” however, the Apostle had not taught the Corinthians; he had only taught them the alphabet of Christianity, for they were still but “babes”—they were still only “fleshly” (1 Corinthians 3:3). That the Apostle himself not only grasped the higher truths which he designates the “wisdom” of the gospel, but taught them gladly when there were hearers capable of appreciating them, is evident from many passages in the Epistles to the Romans, Colossians, and Ephesians, where he unfolds the “mysteries” of the gospel (Romans 16:25).

Yet not.—Better, a wisdom, however, not of this world.

That come to nought.—Better, which are being brought to nothing, the reference here is not to the inherent transitoriness of human wisdom and teachers, but to the fact that they are being brought to nothing by God’s rejection of them, and His choice of the “weak” things as the means of spreading the gospel (1 Corinthians 1:28).