Individuals among you are saying
The Greek word "λέγει" (legei) implies ongoing action, suggesting that these declarations were not isolated incidents but a persistent issue. The phrase highlights the personal nature of the divisions, as it was individuals within the community who were aligning themselves with different leaders. This reflects the human tendency to seek identity and validation through association with prominent figures, a tendency that can detract from the unity in Christ.

'I follow Paul'
Paul was the founder of the Corinthian church and a pivotal figure in spreading the Gospel to the Gentiles. His teachings emphasized grace and the transformative power of the Gospel. The Greek word "Παύλου" (Paulou) signifies those who might have been drawn to his intellectual approach and theological depth.

'I follow Apollos'
Apollos was known for his eloquence and knowledge of the Scriptures (Acts 18:24). The Greek "Ἀπολλῶ" (Apollō) suggests a group attracted to his rhetorical skills and perhaps his Alexandrian background, which might have appealed to those who valued wisdom and eloquence.

'I follow Cephas'
Cephas, or Peter, was one of the original apostles and a leading figure in the early Jewish Christian community. The Greek "Κηφᾶ" (Kēpha) indicates those who might have been drawn to his authority and connection to the Jewish roots of the faith.

'I follow Christ.'
While this declaration seems the most appropriate, it is possible that even this group was using the name of Christ to assert superiority over others. The Greek "Χριστόν" (Christon) underscores the centrality of Christ in the faith, yet Paul’s concern is that even this allegiance can be misused to foster division rather than unity.

1. ST. PAUL places first that section of the Church which called themselves by his name--thus at the outset showing that it is not for the sole purpose of silencing opponents, or from a jealousy of the influence of other teachers, that he writes so strenuously against the disturbances in the Corinthian community. It is the spirit of separation and of faction which he condemns--rebuking it as strongly when it has led to the undue exaltation of his own name, as when it attempted to depreciate his gifts and ministry as compared with those of Apollos or of Cephas. He thus wins at once the attention and confidence of every candid reader. The Pauline party would no doubt have consisted chiefly of those who were the personal converts of the Apostle. Their esteem for him who had been the means of their conversion, seems to have been carried to excess in the manner in which it displayed itself. This would be increased by the hostility which their opponents' disparagement of the Apostle naturally excited in them. They allowed St. Paul's teaching of the liberty wherewith Christ made them free, to develop in them an unchristian license and a mode of treatment of others essentially illiberal, thus denying by their actions the very principles which they professed to hold dear. They "judged" and "set at nought" (Romans 14:10) brethren who could not take so essentially spiritual a view of Christianity, but who still clung to some of the outward forms of Judaism.

2. APOLLOS was a Jew of Alexandria--"an eloquent man, and mighty in the Scriptures." He came to Ephesus during St. Paul's absence from that city, and taught what he knew of the "things of the Lord." While here, he was instructed further in "the way of God" by Aquila and Priscilla, he having previously only the inadequate knowledge which was possessed by disciples of John (Acts 18:24-28). Having preached in parts of Achaia, he came to Corinth. That he came there after St. Paul we may conclude from the Apostle's reference to himself as having "planted," and Apollos having "watered" (1Corinthians 3:6), and again to himself as having "laid the foundation" (1Corinthians 2:10). To Corinth Apollos brought with him the arts of the rhetorician, and the culture of a Greek philosopher; and while preaching Christ crucified, these gifts and knowledge rendered him more acceptable than St. Paul had been, with his studied simplicity of style, to a certain class of intellectual and rationalising hearers in Corinth. When Apollos left, a section of the Church unduly magnified the importance of his gifts and of his manner of teaching. They did so to the depreciation of the simplicity of the gospel. This all led to the development of evils which we shall see more in detail in our examination of 1Corinthians 1:18-31 and 1 Corinthians 2. It ought to be remembered that Apollos was in no sense "the founder of a party." It was the exaggeration and perversion of Apollos' teaching, by some of the converts, that really founded the party. To the end he and Paul remained friends. He was probably with the Apostle while the Epistle was being written, and (1Corinthians 16:12) refused, even when St. Paul suggested it, to go so soon again to Corinth, lest his presence should in the least tend to keep that party-spirit alive; and when, ten years (A.D. 67) later, the Apostle writes to Titus, he exhorts him "to bring Apollos on his journey diligently, that nothing be wanting to him" (Titus 3:13). . . .