Paul gets into the meat of his argument in a classic Trinitarian passage —
(1Co 12:4-6 ESV) Now there are varieties of gifts,
but the same Spirit;
5 and there are varieties of service,
but the same Lord;
6 and there are varieties of activities,
but it is the same God
who empowers them all in everyone.
The Spirit gives gifts. The Lord Jesus produces “service.” God empowers them all.
διακονία [diakonia], “service,” is essentially a profane concept. The word must be allowed to keep the general character of its significance. The essential point is precisely that everyday acts of service are now set on a par with the recognized, supernatural phenomena of the Spirit.
Hans Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians: A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Hermeneia 67; ed. George W. MacRae; trans. James W. Leitch; Accordance electronic ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1975), 208.
This is a powerful point, which Paul builds on. Although the Spirit produces spiritual gifts (charismata), Jesus himself — the Lord! — produces all sorts of service — not just spiritual gifts — but all gifts and all service are empowered by God — who unites and gives equal value to all.
(1Co 12:7 ESV) 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.
Paul continues to press his point. The gifts are not all the same, but they all serve the same end: “the common good.”
(1Co 12:8-11 ESV) 8 For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.
Paul next lists spiritual gifts to make the point that all come from the same Spirit and the choice as to whom receives which gift is the Spirit’s choice.
It’s seriously tempting to try to discern what each gift Paul describes might be, but it’s a futile effort. We just don’t know enough about this topic — ironic, given that the chapter was written so that we’d not be ignorant regarding spiritual gifts. In fact, it tends to demonstrate just how ignorant we are.
The couplet of wisdom and knowledge is common in the Old Testament, but begins with 2 Chron 1:10-12. These are the very gifts requested by Solomon and given to him by God.
Given that all Christians have faith, it’s hard to know just what Paul means by “faith” as a spiritual gift. He could mean faithfulness. He could mean the kind of faith that moves mountains. I know I’ve been part of decisions where the difficult, risky but better choice was driven by a person of faith, whose faith gave her the courage to press for a hard, even scary decision.
“Healings” seems plain enough, as does “worker of miracles,” although I have trouble seeing these as two entirely different things.
“Prophecy” we’ve discussed. It’s not quite as obvious as we tend to think. The ability to distinguish between spirits likely means the ability to discern which spirits are from God and which are not —
(1Jo 4:1-3 ESV) Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.
Finally, Paul mentions tongues and the ability to interpret tongues. Up to this point, all the gifts, as unclear as they may be, could easily be associated with the work of Jesus — as the one person with all the gifts of the Spirit, received without measure. But there is no evidence that Jesus ever spoke in tongues.
In fact, the first reference to “tongues” is Acts 2. The challenge we have as exegetes is that “tongues” was a standard way of saying “languages.” Only in English does “tongues” sound like “ecstatic speech empowered by the Spirit.” To a Greek speaker, the first and most natural translation would be “languages.”
And it’s clear enough that in Acts 2 the apostles were heard to speak in foreign but human languages — the languages of their audience. And therefore many argue that “tongues” in 1 Cor 12 necessarily carries the same meaning.
It is clear from v. 11 that these tongues could be translated, making them a language of some sort. Less clear is whether human languages are in mind. But we need to reserve this question until further evidence is in hand.
(1Co 12:11 ESV) 11 All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.
This is, to me, a critically important verse because it explains how the decision is made as to whom receives which gift. The Spirit decides.
It seems unlikely that Paul would speak this way if Paul, by the laying on of hands, decided himself who would receive gifts. Rather, the choice is not apostolic but pneumatic. The Spirit decides.
Paul refused to personally baptize most of his converts in Corinth, for fear that they’d take too much pride in who did the immersing. Imagine how much more pride they would have taken if Paul only laid hands on some to give some miraculous gifts!
No, the likelihood is that those who had special spiritual gifts did so because the Spirit so decided.
(1Co 12:12 ESV) For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ.
Paul now brings to the fore one of the most powerful metaphors for the church: a body, indeed, as he’ll soon say, the body of Christ.
Paul describes the church as both a Spirit-filled temple (3:16; cf. 6:19) and a Spirit-filled body (12:13; cf. 6:19). There may be some relationship between Paul’s understanding of the church as the Spirit-indwelt temple of God and Jesus’ identification of his body with God’s temple (Matt. 26:61; 27:40; Mark 14:58; 15:29; John 2:19–21). Paul’s usage of the body metaphor appears to be an interesting variation on an ancient rhetorical commonplace relating to corporate solidarity and unity (see Mitchell 1991: 157–64).
G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, UK: Baker Academic; Apollos, 2007), 737.
If the church is the “body of Christ,” then the church should bear the marks of crucifixion. Indeed, to enter the body would be to take on the character of Jesus’ body as a sacrifice.
(Gal 2:20 ESV) 20 I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.
As I said. It’s a powerful metaphor.
Moreover, as taught by Rubel Shelly and Randall Harris in The Second Incarnation, 
In 1 Corinthians 12, however, Paul makes the point that as a body, the church is a single organism and not divisible. We Christians are “members” of the body (just as an arm or a leg is a “member”), but we have a meaningful existence as we connect to and relate with the rest of the body. Alone we are incomplete and inadequate. God joins us to one another because we need each other, and the world needs us to be united.
And, implicitly, to the extent we choose to go it alone, we choose to divide the body of Christ — a fearsome thought indeed.
Too bad that we have so developed our own traditions and doctrinal stances to the point that we amputated most of the parts from each other. We (church) look more like the bride of Frankenstein than of Christ. Or perhaps we are the new Abby Normal. There needs to be reconnective surgery IMO