1 Corinthians 11:25-26

After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. (KJV)

Then: The second section of the communion is to remember the New Testament (Hayes, p. 123) while drinking from the cup. Henry organizes his discussion into four sections: the materials, the sacamental actions, remembrance and declaration of Christ's death, and its designation as a frequent, perpetual ordinance. The Corinthians needed all these reminders in order to return their thoughts to Christ and away from wanton fellowship.

Now: In a short exposition about communion, Owen Strachan focuses on the aspect of confession during the sacrament. Having a dedicated time for gathered believers to feel close to God, confess their belief in him and proclaim his act of sacrifice is the central expression of loving Christ. Strachan's point is that evangelistic churches miss out on the sense of sacredness encompassed in quiet order of liturgical churches. Yet, no matter the environment, Christ abides in the hearts of all through the act. Communion confession and participation is ultimately a heart experience.

Extra Source: First Corinthians by Richard B. Hayes (John Knox Press, 1997) on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=M_PC0PAs3VYC&dq=1+Corinthians+and+Richard+B.+Hays&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=2oPcStDCIIvf8Aaq0Ki3BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CCMQ6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%20and%20Richard%20B.%20Hays&f=falseCommentary on the Whole Bible Acts to Revelation Vol VI by Matthew Henry online at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc6.iCor.xii.html
The Strange and Other Worldly Rite of Communion by Owen Strachan, online at http://owenstrachan.com/2009/09/06/the-strange-and-otherworldly-rite-of-communion-thoughts-on-1-corinthians-11-and-john-6/

1 Corinthians 11:23-24

For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. (KJV)

Then: What the Corinthians needed was a reorientation as to the tradition of taking communion (Dunn and Rogeson, p. 1339). Remember. Remember the Lord. Remember that the Lord was betrayed by a follower. Remember his body, the body of Christ which was broken and which is now the church. Remember with each bite of bread. Remember.

Now: The words of these verses are often read aloud before and during communion. Believers are called to think again about Christ and his love. They also remember that what the Lord did was planned from the beginning. All humanity can be forgiven because of the Lord's endurance and faithfulness. His act within the tradition of the Passover supper also reminds believers of the history of the Lord's faithfulness. Communion is a quiet moment of reflection and a joyous hope.

Extra source: Eerdmans commentary on the Bible by James D. G. Dunn, John William Rogerson on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=2Vo-11umIZQC&pg=PA1353&lpg=PA1353&dq=1+Corinthians+9+commentary&source=bl&ots=5QeQaYWrMS&sig=S5F3KcA_TvNMyywqRiimySoUYtc&hl=en&ei=QqHPSouICIWj8AaZxqyABA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CBkQ6AEwBzgU#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%209%20commentary&f=false

1 Corinthians 11:20-22

When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. (KJV)

Then: Early congregations did not have a specified building for meeting. People gathered in the homes of those with the largest houses. Baker (p. 168) describes these villa-style homes with one large room, a triclinium, for nine to ten people to eat while reclining on couches while another room without a table, an atrium, could accomodate thirty or forty people to eat while standing or possibly sitting. Laborers and slaves arriving late would find that all the food was gone, already eaten by the rich, leisurely, early arrivals who had been "grazing" (Magness, class notes, 10-17-09). Obviously, some even became drunk. Henry calls their actions corrupt. By being inconsiderate to the poor, caring only for their own food lusts, and indulging in a desire to drink, they disdained communion between themselves and Christ, let alone communion between themselves and other believers.

Now: For the most part, manner and mode of communion is settled as an event limited to the Lord and a single believer. Rarely does it involve a sense of group worship. A whole meal is not involved - probably a major result of Paul's teaching here. Community meals do occur as potlucks where the Lord is included only while grace is being asked. That part is no longer a problem. However, to the extent that the act of communion involves personal attitudes towards fellow believers, problems can prevail. When rich evaluate the poor as unworthy associates, when laborers disdain the value and decisions of CEO's, when classmates exclude unpopular students according to intellect, clothing, or behavior - fellow believer's all, then the Lord's death is devalued. Spiritual growth requires the setting aside of personal likes and dislikes. Those saved have a new task - that of looking to the lost, to draw them in, and to promote changes in attitudes, behaviors, and wisdom. Communion is the act of relating to other believers and Christ at the same time.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.
Commentary on the Whole Bible Acts to Revelation Vol VI by Matthew Henry online at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc6.iCor.xii.html

1 Corinthians 11:17-19

Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you (KJV)

Then: Before, when Paul first began to talk about women and men's appearances during a worship service, he took time for praise (11:2). Not now. Here he launches into disapproval. The church is supposed to meet for encouragement and spiritual growth of its members. The problems in Corinth distort the purpose. Paul knows heresies exist in the minds of members because there are so many contentious groups. Interestingly, Paul's discussion of divisions makes verse 16, which already referred to contentions, a hinge for moving into his next concern about communion. The door is open and he barges in. Baker (p. 168) says their actions undermined the purposes of meeting together and made belief in Christ seem trivial.

Now: The same thing happens in today's church's no matter the issue, but if concern centers on communion and practices of observing it, then the issue is just as pivotal to the growth and spiritual life of believers. Today's church profits from the many years in which the church sorted through the myriad of controversies surrounding the Lord's Supper. Those issues are mostly settled.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

Summary - 1 Corinthians 11:17-30

Passage is often used as basis for communion meditations. It is the second time Paul addresses the topic of communion in this letter. His comments from 10:14-22 addressed inner motivations. This section moves into that again, but from a different problem.

1 Corinthians 11:16

But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God (KJV)

Then: Odd placement for this verse. It doesn't seem to relate to what came before, unless Paul is reacting to complaints received about women's dress - which he considered contentious - and is piqued about having to discuss the whole thing in the first place. (I'm rather tired of the topic myself.) Some believe Paul purposefully changed the pattern of covered heads in temple worship to being uncovered in Christian worship. Perhaps some men were objecting to that. Baker (p. 165) supports an understanding that other churches followed Paul's teachings about covered and uncovered heads. Corinthian men should too.

Now: Would that contention were never a part of any church in the Lord's kingdom. Would that peace only reigned even when differences of opinion pop up. Would that contention never led to church splits, but all things were resolved based on the teachings of the Holy Spirit. Unfortunately, the desire and the actuality differ.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 11:13-15

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

1 Corinthians 11:11-12

Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God (KJV)

Then: Paul is moving on in his reasons for distinguishing the sexes in a worship service. He turns from Creation's evidence to the interrelation of men and women. Following the Lord's initial action, the existence of all succeeding generations comes from those which preceded. No man nor woman exsits independently of the other. They serve in unity and community.

Now: The obvious meaning relates to the ongoing reproduction of mankind from generation to generation. Paul calls upon that to support his teaching that men and women should worship together in a seemly, ordered fashion. In short, order in creation requires order in worship. To signify both order and headship, some rely upon an extended meaning of women wearing head coverings. Phillips (p. 241) understands them to be the means by which the woman can assume a man's role of teaching, preaching, reading scripture, praying, or singing - any of the leadership functions - when wearing a head cloth because the cloth signfies her being under authority. That point of view assumes roles in the kingdom are based on sex, and not on individual gifts and talents bestowed by the Spirit. It sidesteps Paul's earlier presentation and does not explain the perception of limited acceptance into the Lord's kingdom. Phillips (p. 239) makes an unsupported assertion that women are not inferior to men. Within all top-to-bottom analyses of herarchies something is always superior to something else. That holds true for an authoritarian church. There is no other logical conclusion. This conclusion conflicts, however, with Paul's later comparison of the church as a single, integral unit (the church or a human body) which operates using reciprocal submission.

Extra source: Exploring 1 Corinthians: an expository commentary by John Phillips. Grand Rapids MI: Kregel Publications, c2002.

I Corinthians 11:10

For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels (NKJ)

Then: Paul gives the Corinthians two rationales. The first, a visible symbol reminds worshipers of the Lord's past action in creation. He brought the woman out of man for the sake of man. Unexpectedly though, Paul does not follow up by restating that the woman's head ought to be covered. Instead he moves to a philosophical wording of "power on her head." If he had stayed with the literal, the comparison would have been clear. He didn't. So how is "power" to be understood? Some translate the words as "sign of authority" and some add the word "head covering." Fee (p. 839) says that in some textual use the Greek pronoun means "control of" rather than "power over."

As discussed before, confusion comes from the implications of Paul's analogical detail of covering. It doesn't come from his teachings about conducting worship services in an orderly manner. In the first translation - "authority on" women have no choice - whether they believe or do not believe in Christ. For women, Christ's death did not restore the creation on earth as God originally intended it. On earth, women's sin in the garden is still unforgiven because the effect of the sin stays in place even during worship services. In the second translation, women may choose to subject themselves to the authority of Christ, deny self, put others first and subject themselves to the needs and spiritual good of all co-believers in the kingdom - men and women. They have equal access to the Lord and equal freedom to use gifts given through the Spirit. In the second translation, a head covering is symbolic of the Lord's original creation and reminder of what happened before. Baker's notes (p. 157) present another predominant understanding regarding "power." Because of the Greek grammar, the translation has to have an active, not a passive sense. Therefore, when a woman wore a head covering she was exhibiting and taking personal control over her own head and demonstrating a choice to honor her husband or other male authority. Through here personal action, she was authorized to take part in worship with men. The head covering shows that authorization.

The verse's second rational follows the word "because." The woman needs "power on her head" because of the angels." No one is sure what Paul meant by bringing in the angels. Consequently, the verse's acceptance and understandings for the Corinthians is a matter of conjecture. A few commentators (including Augustine) believed that angels are present in church services. Although personal experience is never a verifiable basis for knowing truth, it is the reason I know angels are present.* Assuming Paul knew angels were present in worship services, some commentators state that women's head covering maintains a sex distinction which bears witness to the angels of the Lord's greatness in his creation. The distinction is necessary because eventually humans will have authority over the angels. That authority needs to be accepted by the angels themselves. Certainly, it is a conclusion of this section of Paul's presentation.

Now: In western societies women do not stick to specific dress codes. Variety and diversity is the mark of the day. Technology advancements allow for limitless production of clothing styles, materials, and appearance. The main goal for Christian women is to be modest, be functional in a work place, and be fairly acceptable to mainstream fashions. Looking wierd erects barriers which can signal disapproval of non-believers. It also precludes initial, friendly contacts wherein the gospel might be taught. Since dress is so varied, saying that women have to wear dresses and men slacks in church is meaningless.** The male/female distinctions of creation are obvious. If the translation of the verb means "self-control," the voluntary submission of personal goals and desires to the good of co-believers, provides no problem in today's services; however, if the translation means the necessity of displaying a literal, physical authority of men over women, then few services are in compliance.

Extra source: The First Epistle to the Corinthians by Gordon D. Fee (Eerdman's 1987) online http://books.google.com/books?id=XlBp10nUTXAC&dq=Gordon+Fee+Bible+commentator&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=SwLNSu3nA4v6Mf2XlDo&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=12#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.
*(Instance of hearing the angels sing -- Once with my head bowed and singing the doxology during a service, I heard the roof creak, crackle and open. Then I could hear thousands of angels joining in the song.)
**(Second problem here - Paul only talked about head coverings.)

1 Corinthians 11:9

Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man (KJV)

Then: Still in the account of creation, Paul continues his explanation for 11:7 that women are the glory of men and men the glory of God. N. T. Wright (p. 138) translates "for" as "for the sake of." The Corinthians could understand the comparison and Paul's desire that worship services display the distinctions of gender.

Now: Some commentators (i.e., Hayes, p. 191) separate acts of worship (functions) from the necessity to worship according to one's personality, individuality, sex and spiritual gifts. The corporate body is made of all, with gender as being a prominent distinction. Hayes believes Paul is prohibiting actions which blur gender distinctions because that does not honor God. Hayes also concludes that neither Paul's purpose nor text limits women's use of their gifts and talents in worship. Paul's original intent was to bring order out of disorder and dissension. Women in the first century could teach and preach. It was only later interpretations which imposed restrictions. It would have been helpful to modern readers to know exactly what the original questions inspiring this letter entailed. That could have better focused and specified western twenty-first century understanding of Paul's missive.

Extra Source: First Corinthians by Richard B. Hayes (John Knox Press, 1997) on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=M_PC0PAs3VYC&dq=1+Corinthians+and+Richard+B.+Hays&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=2oPcStDCIIvf8Aaq0Ki3BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CCMQ6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%20and%20Richard%20B.%20Hays&f=false

1 Corinthians 11:8

For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man (KJV)

Then: Paul is justifying and explaining the basis of his reasoning about the concept of glory. For Jewish Christians it would have been obvious. For former gentiles, less so. Their knowledge about the creation would have been spotty.

Now: Those who know the Old Testament have no trouble realizing Paul is talking about the creation. Others might need clarification. The verse is the foremost justification for male authority over women when the understanding of headship is "boss," not "source."

1 Corinthians 11:7

For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man (KJV)

Then: The verse has been used for so long as a means to deny women an equal place in the Lord's kingdom that it is impossible to discover what the Corinthians thought Paul meant -- although commentators try. Thiselton (p. 802) refers to Pomeroy's presentation which shows that the glorified status of men was displayed and inferred from the clothing worn by their mothers, sisters, and wives. Thiselton finds the meanings of "head" to be "source." Fee (p. 116) discusses the praise and honor which men give God because they are created in his image. The verse in Genesis 2 infers, but does not state that God the Father also created women in his image. Clearly though, the man did not create the woman. The source for both is the Lord, so the point is the glory as it flows out not a glory which returns to the source. Once more, the verse does remind hearers that there were two different stages in the creation of man. Paul's statement relates to his belief that the worship service represent the Lord's work.

Now: More attention is paid to assumed, follow-up requirements. Because of the creation, men honor God with their daily activites, their behavior (including clothing), and their life goals (Baker, p. 163). Women are to do the same in respect to their husbands. The sticky concept here is "worship." For women to worship their husband, fathers, pastor, or other male is unacceptable. The problem comes from not limiting the meaning of the verse to "glory" coming from God and proceeding through others. Respect, honor, obedience and worship of the Lord are natural responses of all believers is undeniable and Paul teaches it - elsewhere. Mutual submission of males and females is also taught - elsewhere.

Extra source: The First Epistle to the Corinthians: a commentary on the Greek text by Anthony C. Thiselton (Authentic Media, c2000) online at http://books.google.com/books?id=IHG_DNLpmroC&dq=1st+Corinthian+commentaries&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=W9fQSpC1GILplAfHiumoCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CB8Q6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=&f=falseThe First Epistle to the Corinthians by Gordon D. Fee (Eerdman's 1987) online http://books.google.com/books?id=XlBp10nUTXAC&dq=Gordon+Fee+Bible+commentator&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=SwLNSu3nA4v6Mf2XlDo&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=12#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 11:6

For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. (KJV)

Then: Paul resorts to the common everyday culture to reiterate his main desire -- worship must give honor to God. Probably using Islamic practices today, Baker (p. 161) conjectures and explains a possible problem. Women were used to wearing nothing on their heads at home, but now the whole church was coming to worhip there. Hayes (p. 185) discusses Roman/Greek clothing styles in which women never wore veils, but they did wear their hair bound. Women who left their hair loose may have been considered to be "loose" (prostitutes) with lifestyles normally set up to honor temple gods and goddesses. Adding to the confusion was women's new liberty in Christ. Someone needed to give guidance.

Now: Believers keep looking for the principle in the verse. They sense Paul's sarcasm that, of course, women don't want to be bald. Any who deal with the effects of cancer treatment suffer thereby. They also know that western culture no longer uses head coverings as a means of identifying an individual's morality. It is easy to see Paul's greater teaching about shame; however, the principle is difficult to find - especially since verse eleven begins with "nevertheless" and seems to reverse all that he just said.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.
First Corinthians by Richard B. Hayes (John Knox Press, 1997) on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=M_PC0PAs3VYC&dq=1+Corinthians+and+Richard+B.+Hays&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=2oPcStDCIIvf8Aaq0Ki3BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CCMQ6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%20and%20Richard%20B.%20Hays&f=false

1 Corinthians 11:5

But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven (KJV)

Then: The verse follows, parallels and contrasts with the directions to men. Paul states that women need their heads covered in order to honor Christ. That action also signifies recognition of both their identity and their creation as being different from that of men (Baker, p. 160). On the other hand, like men, as women pray and prophesy aloud, Paul still requires a seemly, calm order which brings honor to the Lord. Perhaps another unstated reason was to avoid offending non-believers; however, some archaeological studies show that it was not common practice in Paul's time for women to have heads covered in public. If true, Paul's direction to men who commonly covered their heads in pagan worship or Paul's direction to women who normally did not cover their heads would make a significant statement of "This is different" to non-believers.

Now: The verse is usually interpreted to mean that women can only pray silently when men are present. They are allowed to pray aloud or prophesy when men are not present. The head covering requirement enforces the existence of an authoritarian domination and one-way submission. In traditional venues, church members assume that the Lord's message (prophesy means more than foretelling events) can be clarified by women to women, but not women to men. A strict reading of this verse states that women should never pray or prophesy with uncovered heads. Actually, the corrollary prohibitions that women should not ever speak in church or teach men come from other verses. The implications cause women to feel that they have diminished value in the kingdom of God. The feelings parallel the hopelessness present in rigid caste societies.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 11:4

Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head (KJV)

Then: Looking first towards the male, Paul brings up the question of "What should you wear to church?" Paul believed any Corinthian male wearing a cloth covering on his head during a worship service would be perceived as bringing dishonor to Christ and to the Lord. Men had to wear them at other times; non-believers would not be offended by seeing men wearing head cloths outside temples or other places of worship. Contrarily though, in the pagan temples men's heads were covered. Of significance to commentators also is Paul's specific words, "praying or prophesying." These acts of worship are often audible and, if not performed decorously, can be extremely disruptive (Baker, p. 160) to another's worship experience.

Now: Today it makes no difference whether it is church or not, men customarily remove hats when inside a building. Worship and honor do not apply. A major question does remain regarding dishonor. How does the practice of having a covered head dishonor the Lord when, in actuality, dishonor before the Lord stems from disobedience, lack of gratitude, and ignorance as to the identity and existence of the Creator? Baker (p. 160) refers to a question of male/female identity in the worship of God. Paul seems to teach that when bowing before the Lord, a male should reflect that the process of creation was different for the male and for the female. The opposite appearance of wearing or not wearing head coverings is a way to mirror and symbolize the Lord's work in creation.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

Interim

Trying to discuss the meanings and applications of these coming verses in context, as they have been understood across the ages and current understandings makes me want to be an ostrich. What do they mean for women? Should they decide for themselves or just say that it means what a husband- or pastor or culture or government - says it means?

I don't expect Paul meant to cause so much trouble for women. He was not telling women that because God created women first, their acceptance in heaven hinged on the husband's or guardian's will. If the man was cut off, so were they. I'm with Thistelton (p.799). In chapters eleven through fourteen Paul was teaching the Corinthians about order in a worship service. He was presenting practical applications of everything covered in chapters eight to ten.

It also makes sense that Christians living with non-believers had to avoid being offensive. Paul taught them to circumvent and prevent as many inpenetrable barriers to non-believers accepting the gospel as possible. In the church itself, how much the attitudes towards women were cultural and how much they stemmed from Christ is another unknown factor. (The higher teaching is that before God men and women are equally accepted and personally responsible for their individual actions.) Interestingly Augustus and Claudius unknowingly headed that way for they modified Roman law regarding guardianship of freedwomen and freeborn women (Thiselton, p.802). Certainly laws granting equal treatment of men and women evolve slowly.

If "headship" has the restricted meaning of "boss" and Paul delineates a chain of command, then many of Christ's (and Paul's) other teachings are belied. "Thy kingdom come on earth" will never happen. The principles of "There is neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male nor female" has meaning only in heaven. All distinctions of the law are still in effect. None of what Paul says about being submissive to one another is useful except to men who happen to be on the same cultural plane. That's the bottom line of the trouble: Are women free to be followers of Christ or are they an extension of the headship of particular men? That's why I'd rather be an ostrich running fifty miles per hour in the other direction.

Extra source: The First Epistle to the Corinthians: a commentary on the Greek text by Anthony C. Thiselton (Authentic Media, c2000) online at http://books.google.com/books?id=IHG_DNLpmroC&dq=1st+Corinthian+commentaries&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=W9fQSpC1GILplAfHiumoCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CB8Q6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=&f=false

1 Corinthians 11:3

But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God (KJV)

Then: Corinthians probably had an easier time understanding both Paul's intent when writing these words and the following sections of his letter. They knew the questions that they had asked and were expecting answers to them. Since everything that follows deals with behavior during worship services, the verse must have related to that. Wallace observes that the Corinthians seemed to be confused about diversity and unity. They practiced diversity in times when they needed unity (or identity), and they practiced unity when they should have looked for diversity. This verse brings everyone together, identified as the Lord's creation and unified in worshipping him.

Now: Modern-day minds are conditioned to understand the word "head" in only one way. It means "boss" or "dictator," and sometimes "tyrant." But there are other meanings for the word "head" and they have priority here. Christ is the apex or crown, the one who is loved and worshipped. And above him is God. We all praise, worship and give glory to the Creator, the one who is the source of our being - just as the source (head) of a river is an underground spring (Magness class notes). Thanksgiving and praise for him who made us is a duty and a joy. The sense of peace which comes from sitting before him has no equal in our lives. Saying that "head" means "boss" is to misunderstand Paul's presentation because women should not worship men.

Extra source: 1 Corinthians: Introduction, Argument, and Outline by Daniel B. Wallace. Online at http://bible.org/seriespage/1-corinthians-introduction-argument-and-outline

1 Corinthians 11:2

Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you (KJV)

Then: Corinthians reading could tell something changed. Paul just told them to be like him, and thereby be like Christ. Now he is praising them. Welcome relief - but something's coming.

Now: Praise is always an encourager. We know the person talking to us approves of what we do and believes we are on the right track. It opens our minds to knowing that hope of success lies ahead. As we respond to Paul and pass his teachings along, we also need to pass along an attitude of seeing others as Christ sees them. In the Lord's eyes no one is a lost cause, perhaps a lost sheep, but somewhere deep inside burns the hope of knowing God, of loving and being loved. May we study Paul and follow his examples.

1 Corinthians 11:1

Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ (KJV)

Then: The final crux of Paul's teaching and advice to the Corinthians is not a "Do as I say and not as I do" argument. Paul advises them to do what he does -- follow him because he follows Christ. To have this advice along with their memories of what Paul did when he was with them provides a clear path to being useful workers in the body. Baker (p. 154) draws upon Thiselton (p.796) to state that Paul believed all his own suffering corresponded to the sufferings of Christ. Thinking of this, surely the Corinthians were humbled.

Now: Most members of the body of Christ are oblivious to the good of the whole. Believers focus on personal growth and sometimes the care of close friends because "That's what you are supposed to do." They rarely consider the salvation and spiritual growth of others, let alone the spiritual condition of the entire church. A church is judged on what can be gained from it, not what its needs are. Then too, sometimes spiritual needs are recognized and counterbalanced with feelings of inadequacies. "How can I be an evangelist?" The problems are both a product of a culture used to letting the minister do it all and a culture which advertises "You need a break," "Be good to yourself," or "Take care of Number One." In addition to occasional philosophical presentations, the church needs Paul's example.(At the same time churches with trained professional staffs overlook the value and fail to call upon the talents of individual church members. But then, that's another issue.)

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.
The First Epistle to the Corinthians: a commentary on the Greek text by Anthony C. Thiselton (Authentic Media, c2000) online at http://books.google.com/books?id=IHG_DNLpmroC&dq=1st+Corinthian+commentaries&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=W9fQSpC1GILplAfHiumoCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CB8Q6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=&f=false

I Corinthians 10:33

Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved (KJV)

Then: Final goal or objective. When men are saved, when they come to know Christ, the glory and profit goes not to Paul, but to the Lord. The "Even as" part of the verse is a direction for Corinthians to do what Paul does.

Now: Baker (p. 154) adds a little more information about teaching Christ by words and deeds. Those with set-in-stone opinions must back off from expectations and requirements that all other believers behave accordingly. That approach leads to unseemly dissensions, arguments, and unrest which repel rather than attract non-believers to accept Christ as Savior. Following Paul and Christ doesn't necessarily equal following the mandates of contemporary interpreters. It does mean studying Christ, asking his heart to be your heart and giving him glory. It means "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself." These are the words of a lawyer speaking to Jesus who subsequently affirmed the statement.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

Labels:

1 Corinthians 10:32

Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God (KJV)

Then: Paul is still giving summary advice to the Corinthians. It is an "in-as-much-as-is-possible" statement. It cannot be an "across-the-board" edict, because there are times when giving offense to the Jews or to the Gentiles would automatically be an instance of giving offense to God. Just to please a Gentile, never pray to an idol and offend God. Just to please a Jew, never deny the sonship of Christ. The advice is also primarily advanced for situations inside, not outside the church. So the advice is practical - for particular instances, for two particular end-game purposes. Bring souls into the kingdom and encourage their spiritual growth.

Now: Christians often focus on themselves, not on the spiritual growth of those surrounding them. Listening to Paul and concentrating on his teachings will inevitably bring necessary spiritual growth to believers, mature and immature.

1 Corinthians 10:31

Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. (KJV)

Then: The last three verses of chapter ten and the first one in eleven group together to focus on putting the honor of God above everything else (Baker, p. 153). N.T. Wright (p. 136, 138) returns to the adage that of course it is impossible to act only in accordance with the weak consciences of others, but for sure, like Paul, the Corinthians needed to teach by example and by words. Consequently Paul accrued criticism of being inconsistent, but if the Corinthians could understand the principle, they too would know exactly when they were and when they were not free to use their God-given liberal rights.

Now: "Do all to the glory of God." The statement is simple, but difficult to implement. Prayers for discernment can activate the principle in our lives. Both forgetting to talk to the Lord and ignoring what's happening in the life of someone nearby are signs of selfish pride. Always seen by others, rarely by yourself, those actions restrict individual spiritual growth and the growth of the church.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 10:30

For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks? (KJV)

Then: A conscience beset Corinthian may continue to struggle with the philosophical issue by asking, "What can be wrong with my eating? I give thanks, enjoy the food, yet am condemned because I eat." (Based on the NLT translation used by Baker, p. 150). People often strike back at what doesn't seem fair. Paul here seems to be agreeing, "It's not fair, but is it right to be selfish about the kindgom of God?" Baker (p. 153) quotes Thiselton and Fee's reference to Psaml 24:1 which was reitereated in 10:26. The food has been blessed and is now purified. So what gives? The Corinthians had to figure it out and accept the logic, especially the underlying principle of "Love your neighbor," -- instance by instance, one person at a time. Paul could only present it, not force its acceptance.

Now: Discerning when personal actions affect the eternal salvation of another is as difficult today as then. Reliance on the Holy Spirt, one's conscience and the Word of God brings forth right decisions. Do the best you can and leave the rest to the Lord. Your heart is clean. If more is required, the Lord will let you know.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 10:29

Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man's conscience? (KJV)

Then: So what should the poor Corinthian do? He was invited to eat and does not want to offend the host, when low and behold, a fellow believer shows up too. Unfortunately, that believer is weak-minded in regards to eating idol meat. Should the Corinthian eat or not? After all, what's going on is a matter of personal conscience and rights. Paul says, "You have to think about the other guy's conscience." N. T. Wright (p. 137) and Thistleton (p. 489) both bring in Paul's view that all should be done to the glory of God. It's not really a matter of eating or not eating.

Now: When Christians face a dilemna of doing something which will offend or weaken the faith of a fellow believer, they must consider who would receive glory if they indulge in the practices of their personal rights. If God, then there is no problem. If not, then personal rights have to be abandoned. If God, salvation, or spiritual growth is not involved in the decision, then the believer is free to exercise personal rights.

Extra source: The First Epistle to the Corinthians: a commentary on the Greek text by Anthony C. Thiselton (Authentic Media, c2000) online at 717http://books.google.com/books?id=IHG_DNLpmroC&dq=1st+Corinthian+commentaries&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=W9fQSpC1GILplAfHiumoCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CB8Q6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=&f=false

1 Corinthians 10:28

But if any man say unto you, this is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof (KJV)

Then: In discussing these verses Fee (p. 490) keeps coming back to Paul's major reason. What Paul does is always for the sake of another's salvation. He will not eat if eating interferes with that goal; otherwise, he sees no problem with the eating. One might even speculate that due to economic necessity of purchasing lower-priced goods and allowing more to be available for the work of the church or the benefit of an individual in low economic circumstances, purchasing idol meat is just "expedient."

Now: Not much can be added to translate into today's world. Consider the salvation of others and do what's economically sensible as long as it doesn't impede the work of Christ. The principle applies just as much as today.

Extra source: The First Epistle to the Corinthians by Gordon D. Fee (Eerdman's 1987) online http://books.google.com/books?id=XlBp10nUTXAC&dq=Gordon+Fee+Bible+commentator&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=SwLNSu3nA4v6Mf2XlDo&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=12#v=onepage&q=&f=false

1 Corinthians 10:27

If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake. (KJV)

Then: This is specific advice for a specific situation and the Corinthians understood it as such. They would not generalize the teaching to other times or other circumstances. N. T. Wright points out the principle of not being the source or cause of uneccessary offense (p. 137). If one is invited to eat out, eat what's there.

Now: Christians today cannot follow this advice willy-nilly. By no means do they smoke, take drugs, or indulge in other unseemly conduct just to make "friends" feel good. In doing as asked, believers will denigrate, not glorify the gospel. There is a point at which a conscience cannot be violated. Each individual knows where it is.

1 Corinthians 10:26

For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof (KJV)

Then: The reason Corinthians could eat the food is that it was created by the Lord.

Now: The areas of concern in lives of today's Christians may not always have the basis of being created by the Lord, or as Baker (p. 151) elaborates, coming from God's provisions. Some foods and situations get mixed in with the desires and goals of people through whom a product appears. Proponents of organic foods versus fertilizers versus pesiticides conflict with each other on the grounds of chemical purity or "feed the world. Both approaches can honor the Lord's creation with the hope of helping others physically. When compared with the Lord's primary hope that all mankind come to know and serve him though, both come out as less important. The overriding hope of making individual actions aid in the salvation of others takes prominence.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthian 10:25

Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake (KJV)

Then: Corinthians knew that the shambles meant the marketplace (Baker, p. 150). Baker also explains Paul's practical advice here meant, "Go ahead, eat what's sold there, and don't bother to ask questions about it." If you are eating away from the temple, no idolatrous implcations interfere.

Now: Americans bump into times and places where they can buy tv's, go to movies, eat in bars, etc. and it has nothing to do with their service to the Lord. At all times though, Christians stay conscientious as to the image of Christ which they signal. Will drinking lead a broather astray? Will buying and selling on Sunday diminish the Lord's glory? Will purchase of audio visual literature bring shame to the Lord? The questions can go on and on and everyone makes mistakes. Jesus knows the heart, though, so asking his minute by minute presence is the way to go.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 10:24

Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth (KJV)

Then: Of course Paul doesn't mean money. He means the good, or treasures of a fellow human being's soul. Henry puts it in terms of another person's welfare. Baker (p. 151) shows Paul's desire for the Corinthians to regard the needs of others above their own personal rights and liberties. It is an enforcement of the teaching from 6:12 and takes it even further. Before it was a matter of lawful deeds causing harm; here lawful deeds should be relinquished in deference to the good of the body (vs 24 next) and another individual.

Now: The teaching here correlates with the second greatest commandment to love your neighbor as yourself. Today's Christians need to do the same as the Corinthians. They need to remember to put another's welfare above their own. The verse shows the ever present need of understanding a verse in context. By itself it could be twisted to justify taking the wealth of another rather than seeking your own--the complete opposite of Paul's intent.

Extra source: Commentary on the Whole Bible (Acts to Revelation) by Matthew Henry, online see
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc6.iCor.xi.html
Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 10:23

All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not (KJV)

Then: Paul returns to a final summary on the topic of eating meat offered to idols. In the beginning he agreed with the liberal Corinthians. Yes they could do it because in their minds the eating meant nothing. Baker (p. 151) adds that Paul draws again upon the pouplar saying "All things are lawful for me" just as he did in 6:12.* Paul showed them the perils of that action- its affect on the lives of others and on their own life if they participated in worship of idols (demons). Here, Paul returns to specifics. He discusses when they can and when they should not eat and most importantly adds in the "why," the rationale for their actions. All things are lawful, but not always expedient and not always edifying. When and how? The following verses explain.At this point in his commentary, N.T. Wright (p. 135) brings out Paul's genius as a teacher, his ability to teach the generalities of the big picture and fill it in with the details of practical everyday applications.

Now: Today's Christians need to search for the parallels. They need to sort out what the law allows as compared to what is useful for missionary work. It is lawful to drink wine, but a disaster for those who can't handle alcohol. It is lawful to buy newspapers or magazines with almost pornographic ads in them, but not wise to leave around for impressionable young minds or those seeking love in wrong places. That's Paul' point for Americans today.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.
* Sayings similar to today's "Everybody does it," "Don't ask, Don't tell," "You can't teach an old dog new tricks," etc.

Interim

I expected Paul's discussion of Communion to relate more directly to the Corinthians views on knowledge and wisdom. Instead, the presentation is not oblique and not indirect, but more like a grandfather, grandchild relationship. At a second level, the discussion is tucked into thoughts about eating meat offered to idols which started in earnest in chapter eight. It contains today's major understandings of what participating in the Last Supper is, but we pay no attention to the context of its presentation.

1 Corinthians 10:22

Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he? (KJV)

Then: From one point of view the verse summarizes Paul's points about not eating food offered to idols because it may provoke the Lord to jealousy. From another point of view the verse is a transition to Paul's next point. He moves the Corinthians to consider giving glory to God, the one who is the strongest and most able in all circumstances of life (including eternal life).

Now: All believers take time to consider their personal actions and the Lord's view of them. Do we cause him to be jealous at any point? If so, the answer is simple. Stop it! And if you need help, call on his strength.

1 Corinthians 10:21

Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils (KJV)

Then: Paul brings the Corinthians minds back to the Lord's supper, but this time to the wine rather than the bread. Still it's the same as verse 20 --a flat out statement. Believers cannot please a jealous God, the one true Lord and worship anywhere else. The commentators find no significance in the order of Paul's points concerning the bread or the wine. Both Hayes and Baker agree that Paul just has more to say about the bread as the body than than he has to say about the cup (Baker, p. 149; Hayes, p. 167).

Now: Paul's principle and directive is as clear today as in the first century. What he says matches Jesus teaching that no one can serve two masters. Today's Christians may need to work harder to discern the evidence of idolatry in their lives, but it must be done.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.
First Corinthians by Richard B. Hayes (John Knox Press, 1997) on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=M_PC0PAs3VYC&dq=1+Corinthians+and+Richard+B.+Hays&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=2oPcStDCIIvf8Aaq0Ki3BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CCMQ6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%20and%20Richard%20B.%20Hays&f=false

I Corinthians 10:20

But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. (KJV)

Then: Paul again answers his own questions. This is the first time he actually names the Gentiles' "table partners" (translation by N. T. Wright, p. 130). The Corinthians can no longer escape Paul's reasoning. They already know that in breaking and eating the bread, they share the remembrances of Christ's death - his broken body on the cross, broken for them. Now as they normally celebrate Christ's resurrection through communion, they deny him by eating and celebrating before idols in temples (Baker, p. 148). Even though the idols themselves are not real gods, they represent an evil dimension. Paul wants the Corinthians to understand and flee from all evil. They must to maintain their salvation.

Now: Today's Christians need to understand exactly what happens during communion as much as the Corinthians needed to know. Anything sacrificed elsewhere makes an alliance outside of God's will, offends him, and tempts him to wrath. Have no fellowship with the demons of darkness.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 10:19

What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? (KJV)

Then: Questions four and five still follow after Paul's thought about the "bread," the body, during communion. Can an idol be completely ignored as nothing if it so closely and intricately relates to the gentile practice of worship? When Paul says "no," neither can the Corinthians say "no." The practice of eating definitely has meaning. The question is "Will they be so convicted that they will abandon their practice (Baker, p. 147) and only participate in the Lord's supper?"

Now: Their are instances of Satanic worship in American culture, so there are today some who must directly deal with this question and teaching as Paul originally presented it. For the most part however, sacrificing principles and performing actions which do not honor Christ is hidden from view. Like the Corinthians, though, choices need to be brought into the light, scrutinized, and evaluated. If conviction regarding dishonor to the Lord is revealed, the practices need to be abandoned.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 10:18

Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? (KJV)

Then: Paul refers to the Israelites' normal practice of sacrificing offerings to the Lord. Commentators take this as a good example (not the part about their sacrificing to Baal) which then contrasts with the unworthy actions of Corinthians' offerings to the temple gods. The verse is the third of six rhetorical questions noted by Baker (p. 147). It pushes (or draws) knowledge conscious Corinthians to evaluate their own actions.

Now: When today's believers turn to the idea of bringing gifts to the altar, they are also drawn into an evaluation of their gifts - worthy or unworthy? Gifts to the Lord or thoughtlessly wasted on anther altar?

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 10:17

For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread (KJV)

Then: Here is the platform for the questions in verse 16. All who eat form one unit, one body, as they partake of the bread. None in the body should be simultaneously associated with worshiping in a temple. Dunn and Rogerson (p. 1335) push forward to other verses and distinguish three kinds of meals: Communion in the church, meals in Corinth's temples, and meals eaten by the Israelites. Corinthians should conclude that eating in the temples belied their belief in the Lord. Dunn and Rogerson also intimate what Dr. Magness points out in class notes. This verse is a remarkable precursor for Paul's comparison of the members of a church being members of a human body - each with distinct purposes and functions designated for the good of the whole.

Now: The church still partakes of one bread while being one body - symbolically during the time of a communion meal and actually, as members serve doing his will throughout their earthly lives.

Extra source: Eerdmans commentary on the Bible by James D. G. Dunn, John William Rogerson on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=2Vo-11umIZQC&pg=PA1353&lpg=PA1353&dq=1+Corinthians+9+commentary&source=bl&ots=5QeQaYWrMS&sig=S5F3KcA_TvNMyywqRiimySoUYtc&hl=en&ei=QqHPSouICIWj8AaZxqyABA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CBkQ6AEwBzgU#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%209%20commentary&f=false

1 Corinthians 10:16

The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? (KJV)

Then: Baker (p. 147) has readers realize Paul is beginning a series of six rhetorical questions. Two are here. Hayes (p. 167) explains that Corinthians who realize that eating in a church communion (fellowship, friendship, and koinonia) obviously reveals a relationship with Christ, must also realize that anyone taking part in a temple meal displays a relationship with that god.

Now: The time of communion is a means of worship in the whole body, wherein individuals join together to be the body at worship. We state our alliance with the Christ, our dependence upon him, and intention to continue carrying out our obligations to him (Henry).

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.
First Corinthians by Richard B. Hayes (John Knox Press, 1997) on line athttp://books.google.com/books?id=M_PC0PAs3VYC&dq=1+Corinthians+and+Richard+B.+Hays&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=2oPcStDCIIvf8Aaq0Ki3BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CCMQ6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%20and%20Richard%20B.%20Hays&f=falseCommentary on the Whole Bible (Acts to Revelation) by Matthew Henry, online see http://www.ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc6.iCor.xi.html

1 Corinthians 10:15

I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say (KJV)

Then: "You're smart! Figure this out yourself." Since all learning comes through interaction with material being presented, Paul tells the Corinthians to use their own powers of judgement and discernment. They need to think about what he's just said and about what's coming next. The Gentiles ate and drank during temple celebrations where they remembered their idols. Christians ate and drank during celebrations remembering Christ and his words at the last supper. If they will, the Corinthians can use their wisdom and see what they're doing wrong.

Now: What Paul says becomes so embedded in our early introduction to Christ that his comments do not seem like new revelations. We've already accepted them and base spiritual growth upon them. To go back and rethink is useful for clarity when making new decisions, but it's just peripherally interesting to note the relation of communion to eating meat offered to idols.

1 Corinthians 10:14

Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry (KJV)

Then: Concluding statement - the wham and the plan! The Corinthians stood periously close to violating their obedience to Christ. The only way they could escape their predicament was to flee. The seduction of thinking they were strong, able to stand just because they knew that, theoretically, there is nothing wrong with eating meat given to idols. Paul's teaching told them that constant contact with anti-Christian values and actions would seep into unwary lives. For the sake of their own souls they had to abandon eating that meat. Caring for the souls of fellow believers is a requirement for members of the church, but caring for their own souls is equally as important.

Now: Satan worship, hidden idolatry in America, is more and more open. A hundred or even two hundred years ago, it was not a major concern. With the ascendance of atheists, and the ACLU, political and social entities are working to put down, overcome and stamp out Christian strongholds. Initially, individuals need to recognize and personally flee the temptations of movies, books, games, or items displaying satanic graphics. It takes prayer to discover ways to confront, but not give ground to the enemy. Denial of the problem brings eternal harm to those caught in that underground culture. They need help to flee because they know the reality of evil spirits, but not the reality of Christ.

"A Way of Escape" - 1 Corinthians 10:13

There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it (KJV)

Then: Finally. An enouraging note in the middle of a list of warnings. Hayes, p. 166, brings out an incongruous situation. He points out and contrasts the commonality of sin and God's faithful forgiveness with the Corinthians' problem of worshiping other gods right alongside their worship of the one true God. He notes the big difference between man testing God and God testing man. If men purposely go to the evil, the only way out is to flee and flee instantly. If the evil came to men, God will show the way of escape. Other commentators (Baker, p. 145) look at the positive assurance this verse provides to those who always meet and bear temptation.

Now: Christians take comfort from this verse, but should not stop there. We need to study Bible principles, Bible characters and lives of other Christians to know what to do to escape. How did others do it? What's a good plan? When God makes the way, it's not a last-minute escape plan - although that sometimes works. Here is Answer Number One for idolatry: Look at the cross (as the Israelites looked at the bronze serpent on the pole see Num 21:4-9). Turn away. Run to the protection of Christ.

Extra Source: First Corinthians by Richard B. Hayes (John Knox Press, 1997) on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=M_PC0PAs3VYC&dq=1+Corinthians+and+Richard+B.+Hays&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=2oPcStDCIIvf8Aaq0Ki3BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CCMQ6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%20and%20Richard%20B.%20Hays&f=false
Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 10:12

Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall (KJV)

Then: One commonly stated purpose of the church is to "afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted." Paul's statement here is a blunt, afflicting arrow shot into the pride of the Corinthians. The know-it-alls don't know as much as they think they do. He is concerned with individuals and the whole church collectively. Paul wants the Corinthians to stand, not fall. How many times could they eat in the temple and keep sloughing off praise given to idols? How many times would the words and actions of a liberal Corinthian be misunderstood by newcomers to the faith? Those who keep close contact with the Spirit of God will know his will, but those who eat the meat (the teachings of others) and socialize with those offering that meat to idols need to be very careful.

Now: Paul's summary statement is a principle which today's Christians must consider daily. When you make a wrong turn and want to get back on the right road, it's easier to do it immediately than drive several miles before trying to recover. We need to take heed and avoid driving down the wrong road. Better yet - Study the map and use it. Don't make wrong turns.

1 Corinthians 10:11

Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come (KJV)

Then: Paul is a liason between knowledge of the Lord's perfect plan and people who want to see, but don't. Captured by past habits and ways of thinking, they can't move out from under the clouds to stand in the sunshine. Paul is trying to grab them and pull them over into a clear view of the Lord. Baker (p. 145) discusses the problem as a crisis in the church, a critical point at which the Corinthians have to rightly understand what is happening. Baker also believes Paul is extending hope that many Israelites escaped God's judgement. Taking heed, the Corinthians can maintain the new covenant.

Now: Like the Corinthians, today's Christians have Paul's four examples and warnings. What we don't always have is an identification of a specific problem. We need constant self-examination, listening to teachers or preachers, Bible reading, and an open heart to hear the Lord himself speak to our consciences. The danger is always great, but the Lord's presence is always near. His Spirit and promises are the everyday solutions for working out salvation.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthians 10:10

Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer (NIV)

Then: Matthew Henry conjectures that the Corinthians were murmuring against Paul in the same way the Israelites complained against Moses (and God). They wanted to pick out their own leaders and go back to Egypt. For sure, the Corinthians were debating who was the best teacher. Perhaps they wanted leaders who would tell them it was all right to go back and eat in the temple restaurants and not worry about weaker, fellow believers. But God's plan for the Israelites was to move them to the Promised Land. His plan for the Corinthians was to establish the churh on earth so it could lead the way to the Kingdom of Heaven. Paul had to help them understand by using the examples of the Old Testament, admonish them, and point them to the Truth.

Now: We still live in the age of the church on earth. Until the Lord returns to claim us and deliver us to the ultimate promised land, we need to continuously examine ourselves, listen to the warnings of Paul, heed the prophesy of teachers to our individual lives and to the church as a whole. Let us not murmur against each other or against the Lord. Sometimes difficult, but always possible through prayer, thanksgiving, and praise.

Extra Source: Commentary on the Whole Bible (Acts to Revelation) by Matthew Henry, online seehttp://www.ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc6.iCor.xi.html

1 Corinthians 10:9

Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents (KJV)

Then: Example #3. He who cares the very best never neglects our spiritual growth. Would he? Just as in Numbers 21:4-9 when serpents destroyed those complaining about the food, the Lord could be tempted to let those who turned from him just slip away. "Tempting Christ." How in the world does that work? (And I thought these four examples would be quick and easy!) Idolatry is the overriding problem, so "tempting Christ" has to fit in with that term. Will eating meat tempt others to go back again, worship idols while eating? Paul says, "Yes! It will." Corinthians needed to be careful for their own souls in addition to those who followed their example. Paul is saying, "Don't go there."

Now: Unfortunately, by the fault of human nature, We all harbor an untold number of wayward offenses against the Lord in our daily lives -some intentional and some in ignorance. "The heart is deceitful." Staying faithful, staying pure and obeying the Lord's commands are the ongoing challenges for Christians. We are blessed when the Paul's of today identify and hold up warnings of the impurities in our lives. The October 19 morning devotion by Charles Spurgeon advises us bruised reeds and burning flaxes to remember the Lord's gentle care for everyone who still emits even one beam of spiritual light (as compared to light bulbs or the light of the sun). Hope remains. We are thankful for Paul. We are thankful for Christ.

1 Corinthians 10:8

Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand (KJV)

Then: Example (or shock statement) #2 following vs 6: Another one of the warnings in Paul's list to the Corinthians. They should be careful about sexual immorality. That major problem stemming from the influence of multiple temples can keep them from the eternal presence of Christ. Paul and, evidently, other religious leaders of his time justifiably believe the Israelites took part in sexual rituals while worshiping the golden calf (Baal). Even though commentators disagree about that interpretation in Exodus 32:6 onward, Baker (p. 143) and Thiselton, (p. 735) accept it. Dunn and Rogerson (p. 1334) refer readers to Numbers 25:1-9 which is more explicit and also discusses eating and bowing before Baalpeor. Paul's concern for abandoning purity before the Lord points to God's wrath - twenty-three thousand dead in one day. Corinthians really needed to know the consequences of what they were doing.

Now: Americans were shocked at 3000 dead on 9-11 and that didn't ever relate to a judgement. There is no state religious hierarchy. Paul's warning goes to individuals who follow the Lord and look to please him. Knowing his teachings and obeying them is as important for us as it was for the Corinthians. Staying personally clean in a loose, materialistic society is difficult, but not impossible.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.
The First Epistle to the Corinthians: a commentary on the Greek text by Anthony C. Thiselton (Authentic Media, c2000) online at 717http://books.google.com/books?id=IHG_DNLpmroC&dq=1st+Corinthian+commentaries&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=W9fQSpC1GILplAfHiumoCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CB8Q6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Eerdmans commentary on the Bible by James D. G. Dunn, John William Rogerson on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=2Vo-11umIZQC&pg=PA1353&lpg=PA1353&dq=1+Corinthians+9+commentary&source=bl&ots=5QeQaYWrMS&sig=S5F3KcA_TvNMyywqRiimySoUYtc&hl=en&ei=QqHPSouICIWj8AaZxqyABA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CBkQ6AEwBzgU#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%209%20commentary&f=false

1 Corinthians 10:7

Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play (KJV)

Then: Example #1 after verse 6: Written in Exodus 32:6, verse refers to the idolaters, blessed Israelites, with split minds made a golden calf while Moses was talking to God. Paul warns the Corinthians that if the Israelites could lose their place during the trip to the Promised Land, anyone can. They are eating at the communion table and going out to play - on the wrong temple grounds.

Now: Same message - if the Israelites could go astray, so can today's believers.

1 Corinthians 10:6

Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted (KJV)

Then: Rather than considering "evil things" to be included in a five-part list, Thiselton (p. 731) sees this verse as an introduction to four temptations or problems (evils) Paul wants the Corinthians to beware. It is a general guideline with a specific purpose. It's purpose is exactly that - the intent, for the purpose that the Corinthians should not want, go after, desire or pursue anything obnoxious to the Lord. The next four verses are clarifiers so that the Corinthians have no excuse for not understanding.

Now: Today's believers can be just as obtuse and dense as the Corinthians. One sign on a road that there's a bridge out ahead is not enough. It sometimes takes four or five signs. Hopefully, the driver will control a wandering mind at the point where see at least one of them. And if someone sees all, then he/she may get the point. This is a serious problem. Point here: Don't do evil; don't even want to.

Extra source: The First Epistle to the Corinthians: a commentary on the Greek text by Anthony C. Thiselton (Authentic Media, c2000) online at 717http://books.google.com/books?id=IHG_DNLpmroC&dq=1st+Corinthian+commentaries&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=W9fQSpC1GILplAfHiumoCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CB8Q6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=&f=false

1 Corinthians 10:5

But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness (KJV)

Then: It had to have been a sobering thought that the Lord who gave water to the Israelites became angry with them. At what point and in what ways could he become angry with the Corinthians? Paul is telling them, "Be careful. Don't let it happen to you. Consider your actions." Belonging to the Messiah is not a casual affair (Wright, p. 125).

Now: "Wake-up" calls are a blessing to those who receive them. Following Christ in today's hedonistic, materiarlist world can be just as confusing to us as it was to those living for Christ in Corinth. Paul's words bless us and his love for the Corinthians blessed them.

1 Corinthians 10:4

And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ (KJV)

Then: As Baker (p. 142) and Wright (p. 125) explains the spiritual drink for Old Testament Israelites was the water which flowed from the rock as Moses struck it - twice. Traditions infer that the rock went with the Israelites as they travelled. As they all drank the same physical water, the Lord reassured the Israelites that he was with them. Jesus, who is the source of living water, assured Christians that he was with them. The Rock of the Old Testament is the Christ of the New (Baker, p. 143). The metaphor made good sense to the Corinthians and enforced Paul's teachings about ways to live and stay under the promise of God's love.

Now: There is no controversy or contention about today's Christ followers being part of God's plan from the time of creation. Paul's teachings were the same as those of the other apostles. Jesus is the Christ, the rock upon which all stand and the way of salvation.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.

1 Corinthian 10:3

And did all eat the same spiritual meat (KJV)

Then: This is a "Yikes!" verse. What is Paul doing? He took the Corinthians right back to the problem of eating meat associated with religious beliefs. God provided food (manna and water in the desert - bread and wine at the last supper). They had just bought into the comparison of the two baptisms, so cannot now back out of the second analogy. Baptism and Communion (Wright, p. 123). The conjunction of God's work in the Old Testament and his continued work in the New Testament (Thistleton, p. 718) is a signatory highlight of Paul's mind and of all believers. Just as the Israelites could anger the Lord by complaining about the food, the Corinthians could anger the Lord by carelessly eating at both the communion table and in idolatrous temples. Those who live in two worlds put their salvation at risk (Wright, p. 124). They may slide backwards away from Christ. If the Corinthians will just think about their fathers (verse 10:1) and the spiritual rock which provides living water, they will have the knowledge to control their behaviors and not lose their salvation.

Now: A common term today is "Sunday Christians." Usually it is applied to everyone else and never personally. If however, Paul who had such a close relationship with Christ feared losing his secure place, should not the rest of us treat our daily choices much more carefully? They may not involve temple meat, but there are 1001 ways to live a double life - and not even know it. Prayer, enlightenment, and confession need to occupy more of our day.

Extra source: The First Epistle to the Corinthians: a commentary on the Greek text by Anthony C. Thiselton (Authentic Media, c2000) online at 717http://books.google.com/books?id=IHG_DNLpmroC&dq=1st+Corinthian+commentaries&printsec=frontcover&source=in&hl=en&ei=W9fQSpC1GILplAfHiumoCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=11&ved=0CB8Q6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=&f=false

1 Corinthians 10:2

And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea (KJV)

Then: Jewish believers in Christ knew intuitively that they were a continuous part of God's plan and now were personally and fully blessed by the Lord's spirit through baptism (immersion). The Gentile Corinthians didn't have that connection. Paul had to make one and he does. It's a quid pro quo action. The Corinthians gave God their belief in him and his son. God gave them his promised inheritance, salvation through Christ. Being baptized is the connection. Like the Israelites following Moses, both Jews and Gentiles following Christ moved into a new promised land, a place in the Lord's kingdom (Baker, p. 142). Claimed and loved by the jealous God of Israel, the Corinthians need to ensure that all their actions keep them within the laws of Christ (Dunn and Rogerson, p.1331).

Now: Paul's idea is not seen as being new or different. Believers accept it as a fact, a solid comparison or analogy heard so many times that few take time to think about it.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.
Eerdmans commentary on the Bible by James D. G. Dunn, John William Rogerson on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=2Vo-11umIZQC&pg=PA1353&lpg=PA1353&dq=1+Corinthians+9+commentary&source=bl&ots=5QeQaYWrMS&sig=S5F3KcA_TvNMyywqRiimySoUYtc&hl=en&ei=QqHPSouICIWj8AaZxqyABA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CBkQ6AEwBzgU#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%209%20commentary&f=false

1 Corinthians 10:1

Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea (KJV)

Then: For sure the Jews already knew this story, but they may nave needed to see how it fit with Jesus' teaching. After all, it took Paul several years of study to change from a Jewish mindset to an understanding of where God was headed throughout all those years before Christ. The gentile Corinthians needed to know the same information and may have also been attracted to the "knowledge" aspect. Anything new is good. And besides, who wants to be ignorant? Although Baker (p. 137) thinks they heard it before - when Paul was actually among them. Baker also keys in to the cloud as an often present sign when things spiritual happened - the ascension and the transfiguration, for instance. Dunn and Rogerson (p.1334) explain that previously Paul's argument against eating idol meat was positively oriented and that with this verse he's heading to the negative. So there's "method," just not easy to recognize.

Now: Fairly often people who know the Bible stories lack the ability to recognize their teaching points. It takes someone else to stand back and say, "Hey your problem is exactly the same as 'so and so.' Remember what he/she did?" Believers today need Christian friends and teachers to do for them what Paul does here. They need to listen, not just think that guy is going off on a tangent with unrelated, out-of-the-box stories. We all need "Paul's" in our lives.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.Eerdmans commentary on the Bible By James D. G. Dunn, John William Rogerson on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=2Vo-11umIZQC&pg=PA1353&lpg=PA1353&dq=1+Corinthians+9+commentary&source=bl&ots=5QeQaYWrMS&sig=S5F3KcA_TvNMyywqRiimySoUYtc&hl=en&ei=QqHPSouICIWj8AaZxqyABA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CBkQ6AEwBzgU#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%209%20commentary&f=false
Additional source note: The on-line advertised book First Corinthians: A commentary for today does not say if it covers any information after Chapter 8. The Contents section is abbreviated in the Google Book previews. Book is probably helpful. It does have self-study questions. On-line evaluation here: http://books.google.com/books?id=cKpy9maLuiQC&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=Corinthians+then+and+now&source=bl&ots=ZdIs9pRvsC&sig=ZMrn7l18_-IoMfNxStR3P0RynXs&hl=en&ei=lG7QSqvcB5PGlAewrNCoCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CBoQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Corinthians%20then%20and%20now&f=false

Interim

Then and Now:
The whole letter looks disjointed of you go slowly through it and now suddently see Paul's jump to an Old Testament story of Israelites leaving Egypt. Where's the topic glue holding it together? One of the commentators (I may find the reference again later) mentioned the "nows."
Chapter 7: Now concerning what you wrote me about;
Chapter 7:25: Now concerning virgins;
Chapter 8: Now concerning idol food;
Chapter 11: Now I praise you;
Chapter 11:17 Now I do not praise you;
Chapter 12: Now concerning spiritual gifts.

Those "nows" are topic jumps but chapter ten doesn't do a "now." Chapter ten must be a "Get-your-head-straight" teaching interlude.

1 Corinthians 9:27

But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway (KJV)

Then: Wright (p. 120) and Baker (129, 136) both describe Paul's service in terms of boxing because the vocabulary in this verse and in 9:26 come from the Corinthian world of boxing. The intent is clear. Paul does not want his work to bring others to know Christ, yet find that somehow in the end, he himself failed. Wright also discusses the support some have for the ideas of ascetism. Nothing here though concludes that the body and providing for its comforts is a bad thing. Wright summarizes that all Paul does is find ways for the body to glorify God as he looks forward to heaven and the resurrection. The warning about not being qualified to finish the race is picked up by Dunn and Rogerson (p. 1334). They discussed the verse as being a precursor also. Paul was indirectly warning Corinthians about the possibility of their leaving the knowledge of Christ and slipping back into idolatry.

Now: God (likewise Paul) so knows the deceitful hearts of men that warnings concerning pride will always be needed. Speaking in plain language Paul personalizes the possibility to his own life. As others listen, he hopes they can see that if it is true of him, it can be true of them.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1 Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.
Eerdmans commentary on the Bible By James D. G. Dunn, John William Rogerson on line at http://books.google.com/books?id=2Vo-11umIZQC&pg=PA1353&lpg=PA1353&dq=1+Corinthians+9+commentary&source=bl&ots=5QeQaYWrMS&sig=S5F3KcA_TvNMyywqRiimySoUYtc&hl=en&ei=QqHPSouICIWj8AaZxqyABA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CBkQ6AEwBzgU#v=onepage&q=1%20Corinthians%209%20commentary&f=false

1 Corinthians 9:26

I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air (KJV)

Then: The Corinthians who attended the Isthmian games lived in a time of individual, not team, competitions (Baker, p. 136). Avid fans could pick out which athletes were serious and which ones were just marking time. Paul locks into that knowledge to describe his own work for the Lord. He had his mind made up, knew what he had to do to be successful, and didn't just pretend to follow the Lord with "for-show" motions.

Now: The desire to win is strong in almost every individual. When channeled into the service of the Lord, results can be astounding. That's why many look at the work of Paul and wonder how can it be duplicated in today's world. Paul does not hide his strategy and beliefs. Those who emulate him can be just as fruitful in the Lord's work.

Extra source: Cornerstone Biblical Commentary 1Corinthians (William Baker), 2 Corinthians (Ralph Martin & Carl Toney), ed. by Philip Comfort. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, c2006.