1 Corinthians 1:12 kjv

Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

1 Corinthians 1:12 nkjv

Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," or "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or "I am of Christ."

1 Corinthians 1:12 niv

What I mean is this: One of you says, "I follow Paul"; another, "I follow Apollos"; another, "I follow Cephas"; still another, "I follow Christ."

1 Corinthians 1:12 esv

What I mean is that each one of you says, "I follow Paul," or "I follow Apollos," or "I follow Cephas," or "I follow Christ."

1 Corinthians 1:12 nlt

Some of you are saying, "I am a follower of Paul." Others are saying, "I follow Apollos," or "I follow Peter, " or "I follow only Christ."

1 Corinthians 1 verses

1 Corinthians 1 12 Meaning

This verse precisely identifies the core problem of division within the Corinthian church: believers were forming exclusive factions and asserting allegiance to particular human spiritual leaders, namely Paul, Apollos, or Cephas (Peter), and even some claiming allegiance solely to Christ in a divisive manner. This disunity undermined the central truth that Christ alone is the head of the Church, and all believers are united in Him, regardless of who ministered to them. Paul uses these declarations to illustrate the very human-centric and carnal mindset that had infiltrated their faith.

1 Corinthians 1 12 Context

Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians addresses a community grappling with numerous challenges in their early Christian walk. Corinth was a major cosmopolitan city, renowned for its diverse cultures, sophisticated rhetoric, and moral laxity, all of which influenced the new converts. The church itself was wealthy but lacked spiritual maturity, evident in its numerous internal disputes.

Within chapter 1, Paul immediately moves from salutation and thanksgiving (v. 1-9) to confront the core issue: division and disunity. He begins by making a general appeal for agreement and no divisions (v. 10), then specifies the precise nature of these divisions by directly quoting the members' boastful declarations in verse 12. This sets the stage for Paul's extensive argument in chapters 1-4, where he dismantles the worldly wisdom, rhetorical showmanship, and human-centered pride that underpinned their factions, consistently pointing them back to the unifying power and wisdom of the crucified Christ. The problem here is not merely preference but the creation of exclusive groups and an implicit rejection of the unity of the body of Christ.

1 Corinthians 1 12 Word analysis

• What I mean (Τοῦτο δὲ λέγω, Touto de legō): This phrase serves as a transitional marker, signaling that Paul is clarifying or elaborating on his previous statement about divisions (1 Cor 1:10). It points to a specific manifestation of the general problem already introduced, making it explicit and concrete. It is akin to saying, "This is what I'm talking about..." or "I mean this:..."

• is that each one (ἕκαστος ὑμῶν, hekastos hymōn): Emphasizes the widespread nature of the problem, indicating that this divisive sentiment permeated individuals within the Corinthian community, rather than being confined to a small fringe group. The individual "each one" highlights personal responsibility within the collective problem.

• of you says (φημι, phēmi): Denotes a direct, assertive declaration, not merely a quiet preference. The Corinthians were openly identifying their allegiance. This active declaration contributed to the formation of distinct, even rival, groups.

• “I follow... (ἐγὼ μέν εἰμι... / ἐγὼ δὲ, egō men eimi... / egō de): The literal translation is closer to "I am of..." or "I belong to." The repeated use of the personal pronoun egō ("I") powerfully underscores the self-assertive and ego-driven nature of these claims. It signifies allegiance, identification, and a sense of belonging to a specific leader's "party." This choice of wording by the Corinthians, reflecting their cultural context, reveals a carnal adherence to human personalities rather than spiritual unity under Christ.

  • Paul (Παύλου, Paulou): Some aligned with Paul, who was their original evangelist and founder of their church. This faction might have prized his direct teachings, apostolic authority, or specific emphasis (e.g., freedom in Christ). Yet, loyalty to Paul over Christ or other ministers was problematic.
  • Apollos (Ἀπολλῶ): Apollos was an eloquent and learned Jewish Christian from Alexandria, a powerful and persuasive speaker who had built upon Paul's foundation in Corinth (Acts 18:24-28). His followers likely preferred his polished rhetoric, intellectual approach, or perhaps specific theological insights. The Hellenistic appreciation for rhetorical skill in Corinth influenced this preference.
  • Cephas (Κῆφα): "Cephas" is the Aramaic name for Peter, used by Paul for its theological significance connecting to the early church tradition and possibly emphasizing his foundational role among the apostles. This faction may have stressed continuity with the original Jerusalem church, sought to affirm the direct lineage from Jesus' first disciples, or preferred the more traditional "Jewish" wing of Christianity.
  • Christ (Χριστοῦ, Christou): Paradoxically, even claiming to follow Christ alone could be divisive in this context. While Christ is indeed the sole Head and Lord, this claim, when made in opposition to other groups within the church, likely stemmed from spiritual pride or a claim of superior insight/purity. It may have been a self-righteous declaration meant to elevate one's own perceived spiritual elitism above those who supposedly "only" followed human leaders. Paul suggests that all are "of Christ," making such an exclusive declaration a source of division itself.

• Word Group Analysis:

  • "I follow Paul," or "I follow Apollos," or "I follow Cephas," or "I follow Christ": This repetitive structure, "I am of X, and I of Y, and I of Z," highlights the pattern of factionalism and how deep-seated these rivalries were. It's an indictment of their tendency to splinter and categorize themselves, replicating secular cultural practices within the church. This verbal expression demonstrates their fractured unity, based on who they deemed as "their" leader. The implied "or" underscores the mutual exclusivity and rivalry that existed among these groups, rather than a shared allegiance to the one Christ through various servants.

1 Corinthians 1 12 Bonus section

• Paul uses the precise formulation egō men eimi and egō de which are classic Greek expressions used to distinguish factions or rival parties in a debate or political discourse. This rhetorical choice underscores how worldly, rather than spiritually discerning, their divisions were.
• The fact that even the "I am of Christ" group is listed among the factions suggests that spiritual pride can be just as divisive as carnal allegiance to human figures. Claiming spiritual superiority or an exclusive "Christ-connection" effectively became another source of schism.
• Paul, though the founder of their church and an apostle, includes himself in the list of leaders being inappropriately followed, underscoring his humility and refusal to accept personal cult status. He implicitly challenges his readers to evaluate whether their allegiance truly lay with Christ or merely with the vessel who delivered the message.
• This passage serves as a timeless warning against any form of spiritual pride or "Christian celebrity" culture that prioritizes personalities or styles over the unifying truth of Christ and His gospel.

1 Corinthians 1 12 Commentary

In 1 Corinthians 1:12, Paul pinpoints the specific expression of the deep disunity he condemns. He exposes the Corinthians' carnal habit of creating cliques around human leaders. This reflects a worldly mindset valuing eloquent speakers or revered figures, mimicking secular philosophical schools or patronage systems where disciples identified with their preferred teachers. Paul is not denouncing the leaders themselves—Paul, Apollos, and Peter were all faithful ministers—but the congregants' misguided loyalties. Their allegiance to particular individuals eclipsed their shared, singular devotion to Christ, effectively making Christ subservient to human preference. The "I am of Christ" faction, though seemingly righteous, also participated in this divisiveness by adopting an exclusive and self-exalting stance rather than embodying true unity under Christ. This verse serves as a crucial diagnosis, setting the stage for Paul's corrective teaching on true spiritual wisdom, the centrality of the cross, and the singular Lordship of Christ, urging them to unity not in a human ideal, but in Christ alone.

Examples:

• Modern churches sometimes divide over favored worship styles led by specific pastors.
• Denominations focusing excessively on founders' teachings rather than overarching biblical principles can create rifts.
• Individual Christians might show exclusive loyalty to a particular Bible teacher or popular author, subtly dismissing other valid Christian ministries.