Is Christ divided? (memeristai o Cristo;). Perfect passive indicative, Does Christ stand divided? It is not certain, though probable, that this is interrogative like the following clauses. Hofmann calls the assertory form a "rhetorical impossibility." The absence of mh here merely allows an affirmative answer which is true. The fourth or Christ party claimed to possess Christ in a sense not true of the others. Perhaps the leaders of this Christ party with their arrogant assumptions of superiority are the false apostles, ministers of Satan posing as angels of light ( 2 Corinthians 11:12-15 ). Was Paul crucified for you? (Mh Paulo estaurwqh uper umwn;). An indignant "No" is demanded by mh. Paul shows his tact by employing himself as the illustration, rather than Apollos or Cephas. Probably uper, over, in behalf of, rather than peri (concerning, around) is genuine, though either makes good sense here. In the Koinuper encroaches on peri as in 2 Thessalonians 2:1 . Were ye baptized into the name of Paul? (ei to onoma Paulou ebaptisqhte;). It is unnecessary to say into for ei rather than in since ei is the same preposition originally as en and both are used with baptizw as in Acts 8:16 ; Acts 10:48 with no difference in idea (Robertson, Grammar, p. 592). Paul evidently knows the idea in Matthew 28:19 and scouts the notion of being put on a par with Christ or the Trinity. He is no rival of Christ. This use of onoma for the person is not only in the LXX, but the papyri, ostraca, and inscriptions give numerous examples of the name of the king or the god for the power and authority of the king or god (Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 146ff., 196ff.; Light from the Ancient East, p. 121).