Factionalism, division and remembering who we really are

I have just started preparing a new series in 1 Corinthians, which we will be starting in the New year. I have just started preparing the second sermon in the series, focusing on 1 Corinthians 1:10-17. The basic premise of the passage concerns divisions and factionalism. Paul commands the church to stop dividing into factions and to work for unity, agreement and to reach the same understanding and conviction. I was particularly struck by the connection between Paul’s introductory comments, the heart of the issues going on and the fundamental solution to them.

In 1 Corinthians 1:2, Paul spends his time reminding the church exactly who they are. They are saints – that is, holy ones – who are united with all believers across the world. They all call on the name of the same Lord Jesus Christ and thus the Corinthians are not superior to any other believers, nor to one another, but they are all equally holy in Christ. Paul goes on in the rest of his introductory comments to give thanks for the grace of God amongst them – speaking to the Corinthians genuine salvation – but that their gifts have come from Jesus and they will be strengthened to stand until the end for him.

Off the back of these comments, Paul calls the Corinthians to unity. He calls them to be united because he has received reports about divisions and factions amongst them. Specifically, Paul calls the Corinthians to ‘agree in what [they] say’ (v10) because, in v12, we see that they are all saying they belong to different people: Paul, Apollos and Peter. In other words, they are all saying they belong to different people but Paul calls them to agree in what they say; namely, that they all actually belong to Christ and not these others. If they reach the proper understanding and conviction that they all belong to Christ, it would end the divisions and factions leading them to feel superior to one another because of different leaders that they follow.

The point Paul seems to be making – and the connection between his introductory comments and his call to unity – is to do with the failure of the Corinthians to remember who they really are. If they truly understood themselves as holy saints, they would live up to the reality of what they are. If they truly understood that they belong to Christ – not to any of these other men – it would end the factions and divisions that have formed. If they understand how they have been made holy in Christ – by faith alone, not to do with their gifts or works – they would be less inclined fformfactions and more likely to seek unity. The key to living a holy life – as per lots of New Testament instruction –  is about remembering who we are in Christ.

I can’t help but wonder in the aftermath of a divisive election period whether a healthy dose of remembering who we are, and who our brother and sisters in Christ are, in a bid to avoid the kind of factionalism and division that took root in the Corinthian church. A lot of our own factionalism may be politically driven – I am of Trump, I am of Harris, I am of Labour, I am of Conservative, etc, etc – and I wonder how much of it might be quelled in our churches by remembering not that we are superior because of whatever political positions we may hold, or the party/leader that we favour, but that we are holy ones in Christ by faith – the people for whom he died – just as are those with whom we might politically disagree. Most commentators read Paul in 1 Corinthians 1:12 saying something to this effect: stop your bickering about who you belong to because you all really belong to Christ! I sense our own dose of this reality check might do our churches the power of good.

One comment

  1. The other day I did a low-tech bible study (no tools, and pretending to be reading it for the first time) and simply read 1 Peter and 1 Thess with one question in mind: how do Peter and Paul address believers? The answer was basically something like brothers and sisters loved by God, holy ones [saints], or something akin to that.

    It appears that there are no adjectives in the formulation: no conservative holy ones, left-wing holy ones, liberal holy ones, traditional holy ones etc etc. Perhaps out of a perceived [ill-perceived?] necessity the Christian world has chosen to use and adopt the vocabulary from political science to carry on the discussions of the day. Examining this aspect might be a good starting point in getting back on track a bit.

Comments are closed.