That there are disputes between you.

When he reveals what he hears from others, he uses the milder expression of disputes, but when he speaks in his own person, he calls the same thing divisions (v. 10), which is much worse than disputes.

I understand what you say, "I am Paul"; "I am Apollos"; "I am Cephanes"; "but I am of Christ."

Not some say it, but you. However, the Corinthians did not say so, but the Apostle gives such a turn of phrase, wishing to show that if it is unforgivable to be called Paul's and Cephanes', then even more so - from the names of others. I am Cephanes. He mentioned Peter after himself, not in order to exalt himself, but to give him a greater preference, just as he mentioned Christ later. In general, in matters that should not be, he first mentions his own person. And I am Christ's. He reproaches not because they say, "And I am of Christ," but because not everyone says so: or, rather, he added this on his own behalf, wishing to make the reproof more powerful and to show that in this case Christ also is assimilated to one part, although the Corinthians did not do this.

Was Christ divided?

Why did you divide Christ? Why did they tear His body asunder? Speech full of anger. Are there some words that Christ is divided? understood thus: did Christ divide the Church from people and took one part for Himself, and gave the other to them?

Did Paul fall apart for you?

By this he refutes their unreasonable behavior, and mentions his own name, so that it would not be thought that he mentioned the names of others out of envy. Did not he say, "Did Paul create or bring you from non-existence into being?" but what is much more, showing the ineffable love of Christ, speaks of the cross. Nor did he say, "Is Paul dead?" but, "He was crucified," thus pointing out the supposed dishonor of death.

Or were you baptized in Paul's name?

And I, he says, have baptized many, but in the name of Christ. He speaks of baptism because the reason for the division was that they called themselves by the names of those who baptized. But the point is not who baptized, but in whose name he baptizes; for Christ forgives sins, and not he who baptizes.

I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius.

Why, they say, are you proud that you baptize, when I thank God that I did not baptize? He says this not in order to diminish the importance of baptism, but in order to restrain the Corinthians, who boasted of baptism. For baptism is an important matter, and baptism is unimportant.

Lest anyone say that I baptized in my name.

I say this not because this is really so, but because I am afraid that the disease will not reach such a degree. For if there was a division in the performance of baptism by insignificant men, then if I, who preached baptism, had baptized, some would certainly have agreed to attribute the baptism to me.