Category: 1 Corinthians (Page 3 of 5)

Verse 5 – or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;

The description of love continues, now adding four more traits of what love is not.

Love is not “rude” (οὐκ ἀσχημονεῖ). The “noun σχῆμα refers to someth[ing] that has a pattern or form” and often “of a type that the public considers standard or laudable.”[1] With the α– prefix serving to negate this root idea, our verb points toward actions that defy accepted boundaries of behavior. The compounded form is used only two times in the NT, both in this letter. It has to do with defying either moral (7:36) or social (13:5) standards, or both.[2] Love conversely respects boundaries of socially acceptable behavior and speech. It avoids the outrageous and scandalous. Love does not look to shock, outrage, upset, shame, or create disgrace. Much of the entertainment industry depends on actions and speech embraced for no other reason than their shock value. Popularity in the world of social media requires acquiring each person’s next “click.” Each video must outdo the last. In such a world, social norms get in the way. Not only is love violated, it must be jettisoned for popularity and profit. Love, rather, does not seek attention and thus acts in quiet ways that do not create a stir or draw the spotlight.

Thus, in a related way, “It does not insist on its own way” (οὐ ζητεῖ τὰ ἑαυτῆς). More woodenly the phrase reads, “does not seek the things of herself.” The reflexive pronoun is feminine (ἑαυτῆς) matching up with the feminine noun “love” (ἀγάπη). Thus the KJV’s “seeketh not her own.” Paul exemplified this love when he used the verb earlier to confront the attitude, prevalent among the Corinthians, that one ought to be able to do all that is legitimate under the redemption in Christ. He commanded the Corinthians, “Let no one seek his own good [μηδεὶς τὸ ἑαυτοῦ ζητείτω], but the good of his neighbor” (1 Cor. 10:24) and testified “I try to please everyone in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage [μὴ ζητῶν τὸ ἐμαυτοῦ σύμφορον], but that of many, that they may be saved” (v.33). Love does more than seek its own freedom. It seeks what is good for the other. This, Paul knew, the Corinthian believers were struggling to do. They demanded their rights, even if exercising those rights harmed other believers (9:1-27). They demanded their Christian “freedom,” even when the exercise of that freedom might damage a brother or sister in Christ (10:23-11:1). They gobbled up the best food during the love feast, grabbing up what they desired before others were well-nourished (11:20-21). But love “does not seek” those things which are only to one’s advantage. Love heeds the command to “seek [ζητεῖτε] to abound for the edification of the church” (14:12, NASU). As Paul will later assure them, “I seek not [οὐ . . . ζητῶ] what is yours but you” (2 Cor. 12:14).

Also, love “is not irritable” (οὐ παροξύνεται). The verb is compound made up of παρά (“beside”) and ὀξύνω (“sharpen” and as an extension “provoke”).[3] The passive voice indicates that stimulus comes upon one from one’s environment. The negation indicates that despite such sharp, pointed, and painful goads, love does not respond negatively. The suggested rendering, “it does not let itself be provoked,” brings this out well.[4] The only other use of the verb in the NT describes Paul as he waited for comrades in Athens. While detained his “spirit was provoked [παρωξύνετο] within him as he saw that the city was full of idols” (Acts 17:16). The cognate noun is used to describe the contention that arose between Paul and Barnabas (Acts 15:39) and positively in the exhortation “let us consider how to stir up [παροξυσμὸν] one another to love and good works (Heb 10:24). We cannot eliminate the sharp goads of life, but by God’s Spirit we can keep them from controlling our responses. Love practices self-control. As such it may appear to some as weak, unable or unwilling to respond with strength. But what the blind call weakness is power under the control of love.

Nor is love “resentful” (οὐ λογίζεται τὸ κακόν). The translators have compressed a four word phrase into one word. More literally and woodenly it might read, “no to count the evil.” But what does that mean? The adjective, used here with the definite article as a substantive, means “evil,” that which is “socially or morally reprehensible.”[5] It points to that which is “bad, with the implication of harmful and damaging.”[6] It is active evil. It is evil made personal and objective toward another. The definite article makes it specific and objective. It is “the evil” that comes to mind in the moment, and which threatens to inflame ill-will. This is not an imagined sleight, but an active, personal, historical act that does in fact exist. What does the lover do with those acts and the memories that they form? Love does not “take [it] into account” (NASU). It does not count it, enter it into a mental file, keep a record of it for later use. At its heart, the verb (λογίζεται) is mathematical, meaning to count, calculate, compute. By extension it then comes to describe the process of how one adds up one’s thoughts, reasons through them, and comes to conclusions. “The thinking in view arrives at sound conclusions that demand corresponding actions.”[7] The NLT comes closer to the original: “keeps no record of being wronged,” except it turns an adjective used as a substantive into a verb (lit., “the wrong” becomes “being wronged). The NIV is closer yet, “keeps no record of wrongs,” except that the adjective is singular and articular, (lit., “the wrong” rather than “wrongs”).

[1] BDAG, 1233.

[2] Friberg, 3989.

[3] BDAG, 5711.

[4] TDNT, 5:858.

[5] BDAG, 3878.3c.

[6] Louw-Nida, 88.106.

[7] NIDNTTE, 3:128.

Verse 4 – Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant

Spiritual experience (v.1), insight (v.2), and sacrifice (v.3) are not definitive markers of true spirituality, love is. So, what is love?

Paul does not provide a definition of love. Rather, he describes love in action. With fifteen verbs (running through verse 7) he provides descriptors of love on the move. Love is not static, but active. Love is not inert, but always on the move. We discover that love makes itself known both in what it embraces and in what it rejects. In what follows Paul will state positively seven times what love does and negatively eight times what loves does not do. He begins with two positive statements about what love is (v.4a), then lines up the eight statements about what love is not (vv.4b-6a), and then closes with five more positive statements about love (vv.6b-7).

We learn first that “Love is patient” (Ἡ ἀγάπη μακροθυμεῖ). Note the definite article (lit., “the love”). The verb (μακροθυμέω) means “to bear up under provocation without complaint.”[1] Thus, “patience” involves three elements: a provocation that creates a weight that presses downward upon us, remaining under that weight rather than fleeing, and refusing to complain while waiting for relief from that weight. It is “to be patient in bearing the offences and injuries of others; to be mild and slow in avenging; to be long-suffering, slow to anger, slow to punish.”[2] The root word is a compound, comprised of μακρός (long) and θυμός (anger/wrath/rage). The resulting sense is “to take a long time to become angry.” Patience holds out a long time before it gives way to emotion, before breaking out into flames of anger. We might say, then, that patience is inflammable. Paul used the same verb to tell the Thessalonian believers to be “patient with everyone” (1 Thess. 5:14, NASU). Some need admonishing, some need encouraging, others need helping, but love sees that everyone gets patience. The present tense pictures the ongoing and abiding nature of love.

In addition (“and,” not in Greek text) Paul tells us that love is “kind” (χρηστεύεται ἡ ἀγάπη). More literally it might be rendered, “kind, the love.” The verb is used only here in the NT. It means “to provide something beneficial for someone as an act of kindness.”[3] The middle voice is deponent, thus having an active meaning.[4] The cognate noun is used ten times in the NT, all of them by Paul. It refers to goodness, kindness, and generosity, either of man (2 Cor. 6:6; Gal. 5:22; Col. 3:12) or of God (Rom. 2:4; 11:22; Eph. 2:7).[5] The unredeemed man has no such “kindness” in himself (Rom. 3:12). It can only come from him as God produces it in him (Gal. 5:22).

With a turn toward the negative consideration, Paul says, “love does not envy” (οὐ ζηλοῖ, [ἡ ἀγάπη]). In each case of negation Paul uses the adverb οὐ (“not”), which denies a thing categorically or absolutely.[6] This first verb means to desire intensely and earnestly. That desire can be positive (e.g., 2 Cor. 11:2; Rev. 3:19), but here is negative, pointing to “intense negative feelings over another’s achievements or success.”[7] Interestingly, Paul brackets the entire discussion of love with the command to “earnestly desire [ζηλοῦτε] the higher gifts” (1 Cor. 12:31a) and “Pursue love, and earnestly desire [ζηλοῦτε] the spiritual gifts” (1 Cor. 14:1). And he then closes out the entire discussion of spiritual gifts by exhorting them, “So, my brothers, earnestly desire [ζηλοῦτε] to prophesy” (v.39). Thus, he does not deny the legitimate and holy use of such strong desires put into action, but only their sinful tendency. Love is the great constraint on all human passions.

Neither does love “boast” (οὐ περπερεύεται). The verb is found only here in the NT. It is to act as a braggart, to heap praise upon oneself or one’s accomplishments. The middle voice effectively emphasizes acting upon oneself in such self-preoccupation and self-promotion. While the verb is used only here, Paul has just used a different, but semantically related verb in the previous verse (καυχάομαι, “I may boast,” NIV). Paul uses that verb and its cognates throughout his two letters to Corinth to speak frequently of the matter of boasting. That word group is found ten times in this letter (1:29, 31; 3:21; 4:7; 5:6; 9:15, 16; 13:3; 15:31) and twenty-eight times in 2 Corinthians. How are we to relate love’s prohibition of boasting to Paul’s boasting as the Corinthians appear ready to reject him in favor of other leaders (cf. 2 Cor. 10-12 where the word group is used nineteen times)?

God has worked through Christ “so that no human being might boast [καυχήσηται] in the presence of God” (1 Cor. 1:29). And indeed, “because of him [i.e., all of God’s gracious doing] you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption” and this “so that, as it is written, ‘Let the one who boasts [καυχώμενος], boast [καυχάσθω] in the Lord’” (vv.30-31). That is the very opposite of the self-absorbed, self-promoting boasting (περπερεύομαι) love prohibits here. Thus, Paul continues to denounce boasting (e.g., 1 Cor. 3:21; 4:7; 5:6). But he does find a place for Christ-centered, Christ-exalting glorying (boasting) for those who deflect all praise to God (1 Cor. 9:15-16; 15:31). This, then, helps us understand the boasting of the apostle in 2 Corinthians 10-12. There he views the very gospel as at stake for in the Corinthian’s rejection of him as Christ’s apostle they are in danger of being led astray from Christ Himself. Thus, he dares, uncomfortable for him though it is (cf. 10:2; 11:1, 17, 21-23; 12:1, 11), to compare their “false apostles” (2 Cor. 11:13a; indeed, “super-apostles,” 11:5; 12:11) to a “true apostle” (12:12), as embodied in, though not restricted to (cf. 11:13b), himself (1:1). He only does so by laying out proper boundaries for his actions (10:13-18; 11:30-31; 12:9). He undertakes this uncomfortable and unorthodox practice as a last resort in view of the spiritual danger that looms over them (11:3-4, 14-15). His discomfort with the entire practice and its inherent Christ-centeredness identifies it as in fact an act of love, not a violation of it.

With love’s rejection of boastful self-promotion, it comes as no surprise then that love “is not arrogant” (οὐ φυσιοῦται). The verb appears seven times in the NT, all from the pen of the Apostle Paul and all but one here in 1 Corinthians (1 Cor. 4:6, 18, 19; 5:2; 8:1; 13:14; Col. 2:18). It comes from φῦσα (“a pair of bellows”) and literally means “to puff up” or to “inflate.”[8] It came to be used metaphorically of pride and arrogance, as it is here. The fact that six of the seven usages of this verb occur here in 1 Corinthians indicates that they had a particular struggle in this area. In its only other use, it describes false teachers (Col. 2:18). This may indicate that the Corinthian’s arrogance is a fruit of their listening to the “false apostles” with whom they had taken a fancy (2 Cor. 11:3). The true gospel exalts Christ. Any other “gospel” (indeed, “another Jesus,” cf. 2 Cor. 11:4) exalts the disciple, not the Savior, for it rests not upon His work and free grace, but upon the disciple’s efforts and the pedigree of their “apostles.”

[1] BDAG, 4683.2.

[2] Thayer, 3301.2.

[3] Louw-Nida, 88.67.

[4] BDAG, 7975.

[5] Ibid., 886.

[6] Thayer, 408.

[7] BDAG, 3375.2.

[8] Thayer, 660.

How does one discern who has the Spirit of God upon them? (12:1, 31)

I. The sure sign of the Spirit’s presence is not spiritual experience. (1)

A. Possessing eloquence. (1a)

B. Possessing ecstasies. (1b)

II. The sure sign of the Spirit’s presence is not spiritual insight. (2)

A. Knowing what is true. (2a)

B. Knowing what to do. (2b)

III. The sure sign of the Spirit’s presence is not spiritual sacrifice. (3)

A. Giving up my stuff. (3a)

B. Giving up myself. (3b)

Those marked by the Spirit are those who so glory in their relationship to Jesus’ experiences, insight, and sacrifice that the love which moved Him moves through them.

As we do so, His love becomes our love, for “God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us” (Rom. 5:5)

More experienced, more insightful, more sacrificial people are not going to change the world.

The world will be changed through people who because of Jesus’ experiences, insight, sacrifice live in such fellowship with Him by His Spirit that the love that moved Him moves through them.

Quite simply, the surest sign of the Spirit’s presence is love.

Verse 3 – If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.

Here then, is a fourth in a series of conditional clauses running through verses 1-3 (κἂν is a contraction from καί + ἐάν). Like those in verses 1 and 2, this condition deals in hypotheticals rather than actualities. This strategy allows Paul to push the imagined possibilities to the farthest extreme imaginable. To spiritual experiences (v.1) and spiritual insight (v.2) is added imagined extremities of spiritual sacrifice (v.3). Two levels of sacrifice are imagined.

The first is “I give away all I have” (ψωμίσω πάντα τὰ ὑπάρχοντά μου). The verb (ψωμίσω, “I give away”) is used elsewhere in the NT only in Romans 12:20 where Paul commands to “feed” (ψώμιζε) a hungry enemy. It is the verbal form of the noun ψωμός (“morsel”).[1] Strictly, it means “feed by morsels.”[2] Thus it pictures feeding, much like a mother bird would feed her young “by putting little bits into the mouth.”[3] This one is pictured doing with all “I have” (τὰ ὑπάρχοντά). The verb means “to really be there” and thus to exist, to be present, to be at one’s disposal.[4] The present tense of the participial form emphasizes what one holds in possession at this moment. The definite article (τὰ) makes it specific, the personal pronoun (μου, “I”) makes it personal, and the adjective (πάντα, “all”) makes it total. This is, then, much more than writing a check or selling off one’s possessions at a garage sale and donating the proceeds to charity. It involves taking “all I have” (πάντα τὰ ὑπάρχοντά μου; lit., “all the possessions of me”) and applying it to the real needs of others through personal acts of giving. There may be here a reflection of Jesus’ counsel to the rich young ruler (Matt. 19:21; Luke 18:22).

Paul added (καὶ ἐὰν, “and if”) to this all-encompassing benevolence, the possibility that “I deliver up my body to be burned” (παραδῶ τὸ σῶμά μου ἵνα καυχήσωμαι). The verb rendered “I deliver up” (παραδῶ) is a compound made up of παρά (“from”) and δίδωμι (“to give”). It pictures the giving over of something valuable. Paul’s use already in this letter illustrates the weightiness of the action envisioned here. He uses the verb to speak of handing a man over to Satan for judgment (5:5), of handing down sacred teachings and practices from one generation to another (11:2), of the transmission (by Jesus to Paul, and by him to the believers) of the truths and observances of the Lord’s Supper (11:23). Here the verb is in the aorist tense, depicting the event of such surrender. That which is precious here is “my body” (τὸ σῶμά μου). In light of Paul’s use of the verb to describe the transmission of truth about the Lord’s Supper, it is interesting to note this precise phrase (τὸ σῶμά μου) is used of Jesus’ sharing the bread of the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19). The only other use of the phrase is by Jesus when He commends an unnamed woman for having “anointed my body [τὸ σῶμά μου] beforehand for burial” (Mark 14:8). Thus, in every occasion in the NT outside of this present one, the phrase refers to the body of Jesus offered up for us. Now Paul pictures laying down one’s life for the One who laid down His life for us.

What precise picture should we perceive in what Paul is drawing out for us? The traditional view is Paul refers to martyrdom, for the body is handed over “to be burned” (κανθήσωμαι). Most of the older translations have followed this (KJV, NKJV, NASB, RSV) and some newer translations have retained it (NASU, ESV). But the oldest manuscripts have a different verb (καυχήσωμαι) which means to boast. Thus, some more recent translations have followed this: “even sacrificed my body, I could boast about it” (NLT), “give over my body to hardship that I may boast” (NIV), “I hand over my body so that I may boast” (NRSV). It seems the evidence resides on the side of the latter. Following this reading means Paul has in view not the mode of offering one’s body (martyrdom), but the motive for doing so (boasting). If one’s motive is in view, the handing over could still picture martyrdom, or it might refer to slavery. But given the use of the phrase “my body” (τὸ σῶμά μου) throughout the rest of the NT martyrdom seems more likely here. The notion of boasting in martyrdom is not farfetched. In time of Emperor Diocletian some believers sought martyrdom. There are those who endure torture “so that they might obtain a better resurrection” (Heb. 11:35b, NASU).

To giving all one possesses, even one’s life, is possible without love. For here again the contrast (δὲ, “but”) enters: “have not love” (ἀγάπην . . . μὴ ἔχω). This again is the precise wording with which Paul concluded the previous hypothetical scenarios (vv.1, 2; see our comments above). If this is the case, despite the highest levels of spiritual sacrifice, “I gain nothing” (οὐδὲν ὠφελοῦμαι). The passive voice of the verb pictures the lovelessly sacrificial one being passed over in the distribution of blessing and benefit. Having given everything (except love!), he now gains nothing.

Note, then, the sad sum of loveless excellence: I produce nothing (v.1), I am nothing (v.2), I gain nothing (v.3)!

[1] BDAG, 8051.

[2] Friberg, 29008.

[3] Fee, 633.

[4] BDAG, 7525.1.

Verse 2 – And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

A second conditional statement is added (καὶ, “And”) to the first of a series of such clauses (vv.1-3). Again, the class three condition presents matters as hypothetical for the sake of consideration (ἐὰν + subjunctive verb). Three far-ranging extremes of spiritual insight are imagined.

The first that is imagined is “I have prophetic powers” (ἔχω προφητείαν). The noun (προφητεία) can designate the spiritual gift of prophecy (Rom. 12:6), an utterance so spoken (1 Cor. 14:6), predicting future events (Matt. 13:14), or the work of doing so (Rev. 11:6).[1] The translators following the lead of the RSV and NRSV have expanded that interpretively to “prophetic powers” (emphasis added). Others translate as “the gift of prophecy” (NASB, NASU, NKJV, NLT, emphasis added). But it is simply “prophecy” (NET, YLT). It designates “declaring the purposes of God, whether by reproving and admonishing the wicked, or comforting the afflicted, or revealing things hidden; especially by foretelling future events.”[2] Paul pictures a state of affairs where “I have” (ἔχω) such a prophecy. The present tense and the subjunctive mood point to a hypothetical situation considered as a present reality. It is the same verb and form as in verse 1: “have [ἔχω] not love” and that will show up again at the end of this verse and the next. A situation in which one possesses loveless prophecy is in view.

Paul nowhere here directly claims the gift of prophecy, though that seems to be his point in 1 Corinthians 14:19. He views prophecy as the highest of the greater gifts (14:1). He desires it above all other spiritual gifts for the sake of Christ’s body, the church. His reticence to directly claim the gift is in line with his use of the language group. He uses the noun (προφήτης) six times in this letter (12:28, 29; 14:29, 32 [2x], 37). He uses the verb (προφητεύω), however, eleven times (11:4, 5; 13:9; 14:1, 3, 4, 5 [2x], 24, 31, 39). Paul is almost twice as likely to refer to the act of prophesying than he is to designate anyone a prophet. The only place in the NT where someone directly takes to themselves the title is the wicked Jezebel “who calls herself a prophetess” (Rev. 2:20). The point seems, then, to be that one should speak as the Lord leads him to speak, letting the words stand and leaving it to God to prove them true and thus confirm him as a prophet. The imagined point, then, is of an individual who thus speaks from God, apparently genuinely and truly inspired by the Holy Spirit to do so.

To this is added (καὶ, “and”) a second possibility, that one can “understand all mysteries and all knowledge” (εἰδῶ τὰ μυστήρια πάντα καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν γνῶσιν). Paul had already told his readers, “This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries [μυστηρίων] of God” (4:1). He later will announce, “Behold! I tell you a mystery [μυστήριον]” (15:51a). He can say,

We impart a secret [μυστηρίῳ] and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him”– these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For who knows [οἶδεν] a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand [εἰδῶμεν] the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. (2:7-13)

That which the Apostle supposes is the comprehension of “all mysteries” (τὰ μυστήρια πάντα). Note the definite article. Perhaps it could, thus, be rendered, “all the mysteries.” He is thinking of the whole of all actually existing “mysteries,” things actual, but which reside beyond our understanding. And it is “all” (πάντα) such mysteries that he has in mind. While it is true that Paul and the other apostles were the stewards of God’s mysteries and proclaimed them for the upbuilding of God’s people, and while Paul would later disclose his experience “visions and revelations of the Lord” so profound that they “cannot be told” and which “man may not utter” (2 Cor. 12:1, 4), he would not have claimed to have understood “all” mysteries that lie within the purview of God alone.

To this he adds (καὶ, “and”) the notion of possessing “all knowledge” (πᾶσαν τὴν γνῶσιν). Note, that here again we have a definite article. Paul is imagining someone knowing all that is capable of being known. By the way, note that these expressions imply that not all things are able to be known at this present time and in the present configuration of things (cf. Deut. 29:29). But suppose someone was able to possess full and comprehensive understanding of everything in both categories. What if you encountered an omniscient, but loveless person?

Paul has had a thing or two to say about knowledge throughout this letter. He told his readers that “you were enriched in him in all speech and all knowledge [γνώσει]” (1:5). He tells them “we know that ‘all of us possess knowledge [γνῶσιν]’ when it comes to “food offered to idols” (8:1a). But, he insists, “This ‘knowledge’ [γνῶσις] puffs up, but love builds up” (v.1b). So, before ever getting to chapter 13 Paul has already set up the notion of knowledge without love. In fact, what happens in such a scenario is that when “not all possess this knowledge [γνῶσις]” “some, through former association with idols, eat food as really offered to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled” (8:7). Then he lowers the boom, “And so by your knowledge [γνώσει] this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died” (8:11). This is an example of how loveless knowledge operates. In consequence, they must submit every Spirit-given “utterance of knowledge” (λόγος γνώσεως, 12:8) to the discipline of love.

The Apostles stretches us yet further, adding (καὶ, “and”) to the first two possibilities a third. Suppose that “I have all faith” (ἔχω πᾶσαν τὴν πίστιν). The context tells us that Paul is here thinking not of the saving faith that all must exercise (2:5), but the special gifting of some within the body of Christ which distributes to some “faith by the same Spirit” (12:9). The definite article (τὴν) stresses the particularity of this faith and might be rendered “I have all the faith.” It designates, then, not the fullness of all possible faith, but all the faith required for whatever great thing God demands of you in the moment. It is faith great enough “so as to remove mountains” (ὥστε ὄρη μεθιστάναι) if they stand in the way of God’s will. Surely Jesus’ statements about the power of faith to move mountains are in view here (Matt. 17:20; 21:21). Paul paints a portrait of one who never comes up against an obstacle so big that he does not possess the faith to overcome it in Jesus’ Name.

Line up the suppositions here in verse 2. Imagine someone who possesses not only penetrating insight into every mystery and is able to tap into the infinite storehouses of God’s knowledge and has the ability to articulate it in terms simple enough for any child of God to understand and, along with it, a limitless supply of faith to act wisely upon that insight so as to bring about that which is beyond all human capability. Yet, picture this super-human being as lacking love.

This is precisely what Paul does as he imagines a state of affirms where you have these three superpowers “but have not love” (ἀγάπην δὲ μὴ ἔχω). This is precisely the same expression as at the end of verse 1 (see our comments there). This time, however, the outcome of the imagined situation is different: “I am nothing” (οὐθέν εἰμι). The first hypothetical results in having “become” (NASU, NKJV, YLT) nothing meaningful. This second states what one then is (εἰμι, “I am”). The present tense here stands in contrast the perfect tense in verse 1. The first declares a state of being (“I have become”), the second a present identity (“I am”).

Paul will later gather up these supernatural realities and inform us that both knowledge and prophecies as presently experienced, even at their best, are incomplete (v.9) and “will pass away” (v.10). Tongues (v.1) along with prophecies and knowledge (v.2) all have a terminus point, but “Love never ends” (v.8).

[1] Friberg, 23632.

[2] Thayer, 4547.