SERMON: “Carnal Contentions” (1 Cor. 3:1–9)
“Carnal
Contentions” (1 Cor. 3:1–9)
Series: “1 Cor: Holiness from Messes” #10 Text: 1
Corinthians 3:1–9
By: Shaun Marksbury Date: December
7, 2025
Venue: Living Water Baptist Church Occasion: AM Service
I.
Introduction
Have you ever heard phrases like, “Let go and let God,” “the
victorious Christian life,” or “the second blessing”? Some of us have, either through old hymns and
invitations in our churches. Those ideas
come from a movement that started in England in 1875 called the Keswick Convention,
and it’s also known as the Higher Life or Victorious Life teaching. It spread rapidly through American
fundamentalism and early 20th-century Southern Baptist revivals.
I encountered it early in my Christian life, right around
the time my wife and I got married, and it seemed like a much better message
than the legalistic teaching I received in my previous church. It taught that there are still two kinds of
Christians: ordinary ‘carnal’ Christians who struggle with sin (like 1
Corinthians 3 seems to describe), and the ‘spiritual’ Christians. Some Keswick advocates even depict the carnal
believer as “only partially Christian.”[1] One teacher, Andrew Murray, elaborated on
this, describing three states of mankind: first, the unregenerate “natural
man”, second, the “carnal man” given to fleshly power, and third, the
“spiritual man” allowing the Spirit full supremacy in his life. He stated that new Christians are carnal
initially, being infants, but that there is something is “radically wrong” if a
Christian remains in that state year after year.[2]
I couldn’t read this passage without thinking about this
theology. In other words, after you’re
saved, you are at the ground level of the Christian life, and you need to
experience another moment of crisis where you decide to fully surrender or
consecrate yourself to the Lord, thus entering a permanent higher plane of
victory where you stop living in the struggles of the flesh and let Christ
lives through you. The message effectively
said, “Give up trying to be holy. … Let the Spirit lift you higher,”[3]
hence, “Let go and let God.” This second
experience was the teaching to encourage Christians struggling in their
sanctification.
It is indeed a comforting message to those who feel like
they’re spinning their wheels in the Christian faith. However, many biblical teachers have pointed
out problems here. It may result in a “euphoria
of consecration,” but it failed to address the complex spiritual struggles
Christians face in a fallen world.[4] First, being a “carnal” Christian isn’t a permanent
category from which we must ascend, for that would create two classes of
Christians.[5]
Second, it turns sanctification into a
one-time crisis experience instead of the lifelong fight the New Testament describes.
Sanctification comes from God
progressively, and it involves a consistent application and active effort on
our parts; it’s not received quietistically or passively on our parts, a
one-time deal, nor does it result in perfectionism in this life.[6] As Spurgeon once said, discernment isn’t
knowing the difference better right and wrong, but the difference between right
and almost right, so we must beware going astray. (Those who want to know more should read Andrew
Naselli’s Let Go and Let God? A Survey and Analysis of Keswick Theology.)
If “let go and let God” isn’t a good understanding of 1
Corinthians 3:1–9, then how should we read it?
In this passage, Paul shows us that Christians can indeed behave
carnally and contentiously, but the solution is to recognize God’s in and
through us. We’ll see that in two points
today: First, Christians can behave carnally (vv. 1–4), and second, Christians
should recognize God’s work and their part in it (vv. 5–9).
First, Christians can Behave Carnally (vv. 1–4)
And I, brothers,
was not able to speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to fleshly men, as to
infants in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not solid food, for you were not
yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are
still not able, for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and
strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men? For when one says, “I
am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos,” are you not mere men?
Paul’s stings a bit with this opening; he says that he could
not address them as spiritual men. In the
last chapter, we saw that the term “spiritual” distinguished the believer from those
who were unregenerate, those operating with worldly wisdom. Here, however, he says he talks to them as “fleshly.” The KJV and NKJV use the term “carnal” here,
which means “sensual, worldly, nonspiritual; relating to or given to the crude
desires and appetites of the flesh or body.”[7] Some Christians can operate with the same
mentality as the world, and Paul’s associating them with the lost must have
hurt.
It's important to know that he’s not calling them
unbelievers. In fact, he calls them
“brothers,” which affirms their faith and softens the rebuke.[8] He’s also not saying that they lack the Holy
Spirit.[9] The problem isn’t their salvation — it’s their
carnal and unspiritual behavior, “controlled by the fallen flesh.”[10]
Unfortunately, any Christian can live
like the world, and in cases like this, so can whole congregations. So, perhaps on Paul’s earlier visit, he was
unable to address them as he wanted.
This means that, though they should have grown in Christ,
they remained as newborns to the faith. If
they are “infants,” then they need food for babes. So, Paul said, “I gave you milk to drink.” This must have been somewhat offensive to
read!
When he refers to “milk” and “solid food,” he’s pointing to
the level of teaching the congregation can digest. This was an image used in Hebrews 5:12–13; they
are unaccustomed to the word of righteousness (v. 13). Peter later commands us to “grow in the grace
and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3:18). For now, the Corinthian believers are
immature — not yet governed by the Spirit’s wisdom and love. And they are without excuse for this state.[11]
This means that they are still struggling with some of the
more elementary principles of the faith.
It’s not that we don’t all need frequent gospel reminders, but they were
still struggling with getting down the basic teachings of their new life in Christ.
They weren’t ready for digging into fuller
expositions of the truth,[12]
nor were they ready to handle mature applications of God’s Word. Not only were they not able when he last visited,
Paul adds that even now they’re unable.
Why? Verse 3 answers:
“For you are still fleshly.” The terms
used in v. 1 and v. 3 are slightly different in Greek, and that variety helps
us see Paul’s thrust. One word describes
their state of being (flesh-made), the other their characteristic behavior
(flesh-driven). Either way, their
perspective is human-centered, not Christ-centered. As Matthew Henry noted, “Christians are utterly to blame who do not
endeavour to grow in grace and knowledge.”[13]
In v. 3, Paul explains why they’re still on milk and not
solid food. Just like unbelievers are
incapable of receiving any teaching, the Corinthian believers can’t receive
much more because they’re likewise in the flesh or carnal. Now, even though it’s the same in English, the
terms in v. 1 and v. 3 are slightly different in Greek. In v. 1, Paul says he addresses them like they
are fleshly people, meaning that they are acting like people who have a fleshly
state of being (the unregenerate). In v.
3 here, he says they are being “influenced by the flesh” (NET). This is important because neither v. 1 or v.
3 are saying that Christians are only carnal (a description of
unbelievers in chapter 2),[14]
but that their perspective can be similarly human-centered and not “spiritual.” Because they’re not only flesh but also
recipients of the Holy Spirit, they should know better.[15]
What does carnal or fleshly behavior look like? Paul names it: jealousy and strife. The first word is the term that is sometimes
translated “zealous,” and here, it’s been twisted by the sin of selfishness.[16] If a Christian doesn’t mortify (put to death)
the sin of jealousy in his heart, it will turn into strife in his actions. These competing desires are why there are
fights in the church (James 4:1). As one
study notes, both of these terms “are characteristic of sophists,”[17]
and this is “walking according to men, not according to the Spirit of Christ.”[18] Paul had heard of the quarrels (1 Cor. 1:10–11),
and this is not walking properly in the day (Rom. 13:13). To put it another way, jealousy and strife are
the fruit of the flesh, not the Spirit.
Remember, this problem began as boasting over human leaders
(see 1:12). This grew into factionalism
and cliques. This is no different than
people in the world arguing who the best philosopher was, and it certainly wasn’t
any godlier. Instead of unity under
Christ, they are jockeying for identity: “I am of Paul,” “I am of Apollos.” This was worldly. As one commentator noted,
The church has often thought of worldliness only in terms of dancing,
alcoholic drinking, and the like. But worldliness is much deeper than bad habits; it is an
orientation, a way of thinking and believing. Basically it is buying the world’s
philosophies, buying human wisdom. It is
looking to the world — to human leaders, to influential and popular people, to
neighbors, associates, and fellow students — for our standards, attitudes, and
meaning. Worldliness is accepting the
world’s definitions, the world’s measuring sticks, the world’s goals.[19]
There are Christians who have always taken pride in what they
know, who they follow, and whether they’ve arrived. This is carnal behavior and worldly. Instead, we should practice humility, putting
others before ourselves, applying the truth of the Spirit. We shouldn’t take pride in slogans or
celebrity preachers — rather, we should seek to grow in the grace and knowledge
of the Lord Jesus by mortifying sin and worshipping in spirit and in truth.
That requires a reorienting of our desires and priorities. Thankfully, Paul gives us something here by
which we can renew our minds. That
brings us to the next point:
Second, Christians Should Recognize God’s work and their Part in It (vv. 5–9)
What then is
Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, even as
the Lord gave to each one. I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the
growth. So then neither the one who
plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth. Now he who plants and he who waters are one,
but each will receive his own 1reward according to his own labor.
For we are God’s
fellow workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.
Paul gives the cure to carnality. He flips the focus. Instead of boasting in human leaders, he urges
them to see their leaders — and themselves — as servants.
He further wants them to give God the glory for any growth, rather than
taking it for themselves. Let’s consider
that.
Notice first Paul’s rhetorical questions: “What then is
Apollos? What then is Paul?” These almost express a disdain, as Paul refers
to his colleague and himself in the third person neuter (“what” instead of “who”). He reduces them to mere function,[20]
modeling humility.[21]
He says they are simply instruments, the
means God uses, not the source of salvation.[22]
He uses the term servant to describe this instrumentation,
and it is an interesting one. This is
the term for “deacon,” an office in the church.
Paul was an apostle, but his example was that of “deaconing” (cf. Rom.
15:25; Acts 20:19; etc.). In fact, Scripture
also applies the term to elders — for instance, in Acts 11:29–30, elders were
responsible for distributing money. So, while
elders must be theologians in residence, they must never view themselves as
ivory-tower, intellectual elites, above “menial” tasks.
On the other hand, the ministry is teaching. Now one should see teaching and preaching as
secondary to the other work. All manner
of service is important, and God uses teaching as a kind of “deaconing” in the
church.
There’s one other thing that stands out with this term. Servants are not masters.[23] Some might be tempted to put ministers on a
pedestal, but they cannot take the place of God.[24] The Lord who gives His gifts to His servants
should be our focus.
Paul’s shifts to an agricultural image of their
service. In v. 6, he says, “I planted;
Apollos watered; but God caused the growth.” Planting and watering are real labors, the initial
sharing of the gospel and then follow-up ministry to believer. Yet, the new birth and the moment-by-moment change
is the work of God alone. That’s why Paul
repeats the ideas in these verses — God increases, God causes the
growth. All success is God’s!
In fact, Paul says, “So then neither the one who plants nor
the one who waters is anything.” He is
self-effacing here, and he assumes an equal position as Apollos. It’s all by God’s grace (1 Cor 15:10). Without the regeneration of the Holy Spirit,
there is no ability for someone to come to Christ, let alone for there to be
any sanctification. This is an example
to modern-day ministers, incidentally, for none of us should strive for any
glory of our own.
Paul says in v. 8, “Now he who plants and he who waters are
one.” This is another example to
ministers — we should be unified in purpose, not competitors.[25] Moreover, if they had a unity of purpose,
then the Corinthians shouldn’t be seeking to elevate one above the other. The same is true for the congregation, as
well — no Christian should think he has a higher life than others. We should see ourselves as one, instruments
in the hands of the Lord.
Every worker will receive his own reward according to his
labor. Paul states that God will judge
rightly, and there will be accountability and commendation. This is the standard by which we should judge
ourselves, not popularity or faction.
Paul will revisits this in v. 14, and we will talk more about rewards
when we get there.
Paul concludes with an identification that should change the
way we think. He says, “For we are God’s
fellow workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.” If there is work to be done, it’s done by
people striving to work with God according to His will and word, not their individual
ideas.[26] Why?
Because the field that needs to be planted and watered is God’s field. Paul then uses a slightly different image
that will be important in the following verses: God is the architect who raises
the house.
Christians shouldn’t see themselves as divided into groups —
carnal and spiritual, level one and level two, the conquered and the
victorious. Nor should the people of God
see themselves as the private property of a pastor or a personality. We are all unified in the Lord!
Conclusion
Paul’s words here are both a sober warning and a hopeful
summons. We can behave carnally — being jealous,
divisive, and preoccupied with our own desires rather than Christ’s. But, that doesn’t mean we must undergo some
deep ritual of crisis and commitment to achieve a higher level of Christian
living that rises above a carnal nature.
Instead, we should simply repent, trust the gospel, and
apply the truth of God’s word. In this
case, that means exalting people and seeing ourselves as unified. That may mean that we need to be more
gracious in some cases, and we might need to be more discerning in others. The goal is to be working together according
to God’s word, fixing our hope on the God who alone gives the growth.
It’s with humility that we draw near each and every time, so
let us repent of sin and press on from milk to solid food, to the glory of God!
[1] Bruce A. Demarest, The
Cross and Salvation: The Doctrine of Salvation, Foundations of Evangelical
Theology (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1997), 396–397.
[2] Andrew David Naselli,
Let Go and Let God? A Survey and Analysis
of Keswick Theology, (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2010), 182.
[3] Owen Strachan, Historical Theology for the Church,
2021, 324.
[4] Ibid., 2021, 325.
[5] Andrew David Naselli,
Romans–Galatians, 2020, X, 240.
[6] Naselli, Let Go and Let God?, 300.
[7] Ronald F. Youngblood,
F. F. Bruce, and R. K. Harrison, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Eds., Nelson’s new illustrated Bible dictionary,
1995.
[8] Ronald Trail, An Exegetical Summary of 1 Corinthians 1–9,
(Dallas, TX: SIL International, 2008), 106.
[9] John D. Barry,
Douglas Mangum, Derek R. Brown, Michael S. Heiser, Miles Custis, Elliot
Ritzema, Matthew M. Whitehead, Michael R. Grigoni, and David Bomar, Faithlife Study Bible, (Bellingham, WA:
Lexham Press, 2012, 2016), 1 Co 3:1.
[10] John MacArthur Jr.,
Ed., The MacArthur Study Bible,
electronic ed., (Nashville, TN: Word Pub., 1997), 1732.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole
Bible: Complete and Unabridged in One Volume, (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1994),
2248.
[14] A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament,
(Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1933), 1 Co 3:3.
[15] Barry, et. al., 1 Co
3:3.
[16] MacArthur.
[17] Barry, et. al.
[18] Robertson, 1 Co 3:3.
[19] John F. MacArthur
Jr., 1 Corinthians, MacArthur New
Testament Commentary, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1984), 68.
[20] Trail, 115.
[21] MacArthur, The MacArthur Study Bible.
[22] David K. Lowery, The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An
Exposition of the Scriptures, 1985, 2, 511.
[23] Trail, 115–116.
[24] Henry, 2248.
[25] Lowery.
[26] MacArthur, 1 Corinthians, 75.