Did Paul Say He Did Not Baptize Anyone?

(Is 1 Cor. 1:17 to be understood as teaching that baptism is not essential?)

To get the context that shows the reason for what Paul said, we must carefully read the following:

1 Corinthians 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. 12 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. 13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; 15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. 16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. 17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. 18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

The first thing we need to see is that Paul did baptize some, whom he named: Crispus, Gaius, and the household of Stephanas.

The second observation we can make, from reading the context, is that Paul was addressing the problem of division among a church in which parties had developed among the members, most of whom were calling themselves after various men. Some were even saying "I am of Paul," which was not to his liking.

The third thing we should notice is that the great commission was given to the apostles to go into all the world and preach the gospel (Mark 16:15-16). The result of the gospel's being effectively preached would result in believers being baptized and saved (1 Pet. 3:21). Thus, it was Paul's mission to preach the gospel and assure that those drawn to God by his preaching (John 6:44) were baptized, by him or someone else.

Barnes Comments:

For Christ sent me not to baptize - That is, not to baptize as my main business. Baptism was not his principal employment, though he had a commission in common with others to administer the ordinance, and occasionally did it. The same thing was true of the Saviour, that he did not personally baptize, Joh_4:2. It is probable that the business of baptism was entrusted to the ministers of the church of inferior talents, or to those who were connected with the churches permanently, and not to those who were engaged chiefly in traveling from place to place. The reasons of this may have been:

(1) That which Paul here suggests, that if the apostles had themselves baptized, it might have given occasion to strifes, and the formation of parties, as those who had been baptized by the apostles might claim some superiority over those who were not.

(2) It is probable that the rite of baptism was preceded or followed by a course of instruction adapted to it, and as the apostles were traveling from place to place, this could be better entrusted to those who were to be with them as their ordinary religious teachers. It was an advantage that those who imparted this instruction should also administer this ordinance.

(3) It is not improbable, as Doddridge supposes, that the administration of this ordinance was entrusted to inferiors, because it was commonly practiced by immersion, and was attended with some trouble and inconvenience, while the time of the apostles might be more directly occupied in their main work.

But to preach the gospel - As his main business; as the leading, grand purpose of his ministry. This is the grand object of all ministers. It is not to build up a sect or party; it is not to secure simply the baptism of people in this or that communion; it is to make known the glad tidings of salvation, and call people to repentance and to God.

Clark Commentary:

For Christ sent me not to baptize - Bp. Pearce translates thus: For Christ sent me, not so much to baptize as to preach the Gospel: and he supports his version thus - "The writers of the Old and New Testaments do, almost every where (agreeably to the Hebrew idiom) express a preference given to one thing beyond another by an affirmation of that which is preferred, and a negation of that which is contrary to it: and so it must be understood here, for if St. Paul was not sent at all to baptize, he baptized without a commission; but if he was sent, not only to baptize but to preach also, or to preach rather than baptize, he did in fact discharge his duty aright." It appears sufficiently evident that baptizing was considered to be an inferior office, and though every minister of Christ might administer it, yet apostles had more important work. Preparing these adult heathens for baptism by the continual preaching of the word was of much greater consequence than baptizing them when thus prepared to receive and profit by it.

Jamison Faucit Brown Commentary:

Paul says this not to depreciate baptism; for he exalts it most highly (Rom_6:3). He baptized some first converts; and would have baptized more, but that his and the apostles' peculiar work was to preach the Gospel, to found by their autoptic testimony particular churches, and then to superintend the churches in general.

Gil Commentary:

For Christ sent me not to baptize,.... "...He had the same mission the rest of the apostles had, which was to baptize as well as preach; and indeed, if he had not been sent at all to baptize, it would have been unlawful for him to have administered baptism to any person whatever; but his sense is, that baptism was not the chief and principal business he was sent about; this was to be done mostly by those preachers of the word who travelled with him, or followed after him: he was not sent so much about this work, but to preach the Gospel...."

Conclusion:

The men whom I have quoted were all denominational preachers - none "Church of Christ." Yet they fully understood what Paul meant, and they stood for the truth regarding whether Paul considered baptism to be important. To view Paul's words otherwise would be to ignore or disregard the unequivocal teaching he did in writing by inspiration. See Rom. 6:3-4; Col. 2:10-12; Acts 22:16; Gal. 3:27; 1 Cor. 12:13; Eph. 4:5.