This is gonna be a long one.
Let’s recap.
So far, Paul has responded to a number of issues brought to his attention:
- Divisions in the Church (ch 1-4)
- Brought to him in person by “Chloe’s people” (1:11)
- Sexual Immorality & Poor Judgment (ch 5-6)
- Heard by common report (5:1)
- Various Questions asked in writing by leaders of the church (ch 7-16)
- The responses to their questions are prefaced by Paul’s use of the words “now concerning” [Gr: de peri], in 7:1, 7:25, 8:1, 12:1, 16:1, and 16:12.
- This “committee” of leaders who brought these questions to Paul includes Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (16:17-18)
As we consider chapters 10-11, the last “now concerning” we read was in 8:1, “Now concerning food offered to idols…”
That tells me that the content of chapters 8-11 are all about that. As we considered in the last post, the whole question of “meat offered to idols” is about more than making a menu selection. It’s the issue of choosing to limit my personal freedom out of love for others so that I don’t cause another believer to stumble into sin or prevent an unbeliever from receiving the Gospel.
Chapters 8-11 are all about unpacking that idea and applying it in their lives.
- Ch. 8 – Paul explains how knowledge is not the basis for determining behavior. Love is.
- Ch. 9 – Paul gives the example of himself of what it looks like to limit freedom out of love for others.
- Ch. 10 – How ancient Israel put themselves first and it went very badly. Who are we putting first?
- Ch. 11 – How their self-centered ways are causing problems in the meetings of the Church.
It’s ALL about who we’re putting first; Christ and others, or me. Let’s break it down a little more.
Chapter 10
The Church is not God’s first rodeo.
Back in the Pentateuch, Yahweh took Israel out of Egypt. They were His first congregation. They were all “baptized” in the Red Sea and they all took a kind of Communion together every day: Manna and Supernatural Rock-Water. But just because they were part of the covenant congregation didn’t mean God was pleased with them.
They griped and complained about the leadership. They were impossible to please and constantly wanted more. They gave credit to something they could see for what God had actually done. They were having sex outside of God’s design for marriage. They were saying things like, “If God really cared, He would do XYZ.”
That sounds like some Christians today.
Just because people are baptized, take Communion, and sit on a pew every Sunday does not mean God is pleased with us any more than He was pleased with Israel.
How did it go for Israel?
😐 A lot of them died.
Exactly. And we’re meant to learn from that.
In chapter 8 Paul acknowledges that…
- even though we know that the gods and their idols are not our lords – we worship only the one true God and our Lord Jesus Christ, and…
- that the food offered to idols doesn’t become spiritually contaminated and wouldn’t send you to Hell if you ate it…
In 10:14-33 he explains the other half of the argument; that eating idol-food is problematic for two reasons:
- There is a spiritual reality behind the inanimate idol. The marble is not receiving the veneration, but a demonic entity is. And why would someone who eats at Jesus’ table want to also eat at Satan’s table?
- There are some idolaters who are sensitive enough to recognize that it would be a problem for a Christian to participate in this activity. And when a Christian does participate, it says to the unbeliever, that there is nothing special or different about Jesus or His people. They are just like everyone else. And that undermines the Gospel.
Paul quotes the Corinthians again as he did in 6:12:
““All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up. Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor.”
1 Corinthians 10:23-24 ESV
No, you won’t go to Hell for eating food that was offered to an idol, but someone else just might.
Christians aren’t supposed to make our decisions like the rest of the world; or even the way we did before being born of the Spirit.
The World’s Way (the old way) is:
What will benefit ME? What do I want?
That’s how most people decide who to pursue romantically, what to do on the weekend, where to work, what career to pursue, what to buy, how to spend time, where to live, where to go on vacation… just ALL THE THINGS.
That’s the world’s way.
That’s not how Christians are supposed to do it. Real Christians, Serious Christians ask:
What will benefit others? What does Jesus want?
It’s not that we aren’t allowed to want things. But that does not come first. It’s not the guiding principle.
It also doesn’t mean that we become chameleons, without any kind of will, just going along with what makes everyone else happy. That’s not healthy either. And that’s not what Paul is talking about in 10:32-33. He’s not fawning before others and doing whatever they like to get their approval. He’s just seeking to not offend them and to not put his own convenience ahead of their salvation. Big difference.
We can have preferences and opinions and convictions. But the axis of the world does not run through the top of my head. It’s not all about me.
Paul raises the obvious question that comes up in response to this idea. If it’s not all about me, then why should it be all about someone else? If the world doesn’t revolve around me, why should it revolve around someone else?
“…For why should my liberty be determined by someone else’s conscience? If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks?”
1 Corinthians 10:29-30 ESV
If my preferences are not to be the guiding principle, why should someone else’s be? This is a valid question.
I was once invited by a Christian young man to go see a play. Out of town. Overnight. He offered to pay for (and I quote) “a hotel room.” And even after he, um, clarified, that he meant separate hotel rooms for us, I still declined because I felt that an unchaperoned overnight trip with a man was probably not the best look for a single Christian woman in ministry.
And boy did that not sit well.
He let me know (via text, “the lowest form of communication” I’ve been rightly told), that he was sick of being judged by what other people thought was “the appearance of evil.”
He was, in essence, bringing up this very argument in verse 29. “Why is my liberty judged of another man’s conscience?”
I wasn’t really prepared then to answer that question. I am now. It’s actually in the next verse.
“So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.”
1 Corinthians 10:31 ESV
“Does it glorify God?”
THAT is THE question.
Not, “Will it benefit ME? Is it what I want?”
And also not: “What does this other person want? What does their conscious dictate?”
The next time you make a decision – about a movie to watch, what to do on vacation, who to date, what to buy, what opportunity to pursue, what to do on the weekend, even what church to join… don’t ask:
“Will it benefit ME? Is it what I want? What will my family and friends think?” Ask, “Does it glorify God?”
Chapter 11
🤨 Wait a second. You’re just gonna move on? You’re not going to tell us what became of the guy and the trip?
I didn’t go.
🤨 And?
He got mad.
🤨 And?
That was the end of that.
😐 Oh.
🤓 You still have us.
Yes. Yes I do.
You wanna help with chapter 11?
🤓 Can we?!
Sure. Why not.
😒 Ugh… you’re gonna give us the infamous chapter about head coverings?
It doesn’t have to be “infamous.” And if we keep in mind the whole context we’ve read so far, and do a little history digging, we’ll be fine.
✊🤓 Let’s do it!
😒🚩 Rah-rah.
Your enthusiasm is inspiring.
Ok. First question. What is the overall topic Paul is responding to in this section?
☝️🤓 I know! Food offered to idols.
And what else?
🤔 Um… that the world doesn’t revolve around what I want?
And what might that have to do men and women in first-century Corinth?
😐 I have absolutely no idea.
🤓 I found a couple videos on YouTube that might be helpful. Let’s watch those.
⏰ [11 minutes later…]
😐 Dude, your 2nd video pick was kinda awkward to watch with the naked statue behind that guy.
🤓 Sorry. I was hoping the presenter would stay in front of the naked statue.
I did my part. I looked up every single verse in the Bible that used the word “shave.”
😯 All of them? And what did you find?
I found that a shaved head was connected with 3 things:
- Nazarite Vows (which both men and women could do)
- Ceremonial cleansing rituals after a skin condition that made one “unclean”
- Mourning
There was no shame attached to any of these. Samson’s long hair was not a shame. Neither was Absolom’s. Paul speaks of “shame” (in the sense of immodesty) for a woman’s shaved head, and “shame” (in the sense of dishonor) for a man to have long hair. So I don’t think the shaved head or long hair in 1 Cor. 11 has to do with any of the 3 above. That tends to support the idea of a shaved head being associated with slavery and prostitution and the long hair associated with effeminacy specifically in Roman culture.
I also found that the priests in Ezekiel’s Temple (which I suspect may prophetically point to Christians) were not allowed to either shave their heads or grow their hair long.
We should note that Paul never brings up this topic to any other church or individual. You’d think that if it was meant to be a universal practice, he would have.
Here’s what I know:
The Corinthians have a problem with using their “freedom” in Christ as an excuse for selfish and inappropriate behavior. Instead of asking, “Does it glorify God?” They are asking “Will it benefit ME? Is it what I want?”
Those are the REAL problems and we still deal with them in the Church.
Where I personally land on this:
A piece of fabric on a woman’s head will not magically make her a submitted wife who honors her husband any more than a trip to the barber makes a man submitted to Christ.
If that worked, every church would have a barber’s chair in the foyer and racks of scarves to hand out to women.
I think Paul was addressing a specific problem in one specific ancient cultural context in order to bring unity to a divided church.
Christians – both men and women – are called to LIMIT our LIBERTY out of LOVE for one another.
“Does it glorify God?”
That is the question.
I know that these comments will not satisfy some people. I have no intention of attempting to settle the everlasting debate on this passage. Mike Winger has a thorough (and I mean thorough) video on this topic on YouTube. He goes through ALL the views and arguments. It’s nearly 7 hours long. Knock yourself out if you like.
And since Paul is STILL talking about…
- Divisions
- Poor Judgment
- Freedom as an excuse for Selfishness
…he addresses their divisions and bad judgment and selfishness in Communion.
Whatever it is they are eating and drinking at the church meetings in Corinth, it’s not the Lord’s Supper. They might be calling it “The Lord’s Supper” but it isn’t legit.
Here’s why:
- They aren’t sharing a meal. It’s every man for himself.
- It’s being treated like any other meal rather than a memorial of Jesus’ death.
- The food and wine are not being distributed evenly. Some are overindulging, others are getting nothing at all.
- They are not treating one another as equals. The poor are being shamed and ignored.
- Some are participating who should not be.
While the Apostles were alive (a period known as the Apostolic Church), when believers gathered, a key part of the gathering was a shared meal. Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper in the context of a full Passover meal. The risen Jesus appeared to the apostles in the context of a meal and generally on the first day of the week.
- Sunday, Emmaus, Luke 24:30-31
- Sunday, Jerusalem, Luke 24:41-43
- Sunday, Jerusalem (no mention of a meal), John 20:26
- Day unknown but not a Sabbath because they are working, Galilee, John 21:5-13
In the book of Acts we see the believers continuing this practice of sharing meals, and often on the first day of the week.
Jude is the writer who called them “love feasts” in verse 12, or, as it came to be called The Agape. Communion was a part of this “love feast” for about 150 years. Because of an Imperial Roman edict banning the gatherings of unauthorized groups (which often used communal meals as a front for their activities) churches began dropping the meal and just kept the Communion bread and wine.
One very helpful bit of history about this is in a letter from Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan in about 111-113AD. You can read the whole letter and Trajan’s reply online. Here is the crucial bit where Pliny is reporting about the practices of Christians.
📜🏛️
“They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food–but ordinary and innocent food. Even this, they affirmed, they had ceased to do after my edict by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden political associations. Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition.”
—————-
So Christians met before dawn for worship. Then at the end of the day, they met again to share a meal of normal food. But in the early 100s they quit doing the evening meal because of the Roman edict.
Paul writes to the Corinthians about 60 years before this edict. They were still doing the evening “love feast” which would’ve been the context for Communion and the problems in the Corinthian church.
They would meet in a private home; probably a larger home and therefore belonging to a wealthy member of the congregation. Those who could arrive early would jump in and started stuffing themselves. The poorer common laborers and slaves would’ve had to wait until the work day was over and they could be released by their employers. By the time they got to the home where the meeting was held, the food was all gone.
😲 How rude!
Indeed.
🤓 We don’t usually have that problem at my church. When we have a pot-luck, here’s enough food for a small army.
This not waiting for others is another instance of the Corinthians putting themselves first and not caring about others or what will bring God glory.
It also shows the division Paul writes about. There is a glaring class-divide happening. The working class and slaves are being treated as inferior. But in the body of Christ, sociology-economic strata do not exist. Everyone is saved by the same blood of Jesus and the ground is level at the foot of the cross.
A shared meal around a table is the experience of FAMILIES.
Breaking bread together reminded the early Christians that they were family. The Corinthians weren’t treating each other like family.
😐 Well, maybe a very dysfunctional family.
So Paul goes back over what he had already taught them; “what I also delivered to you.” He quotes the words of Jesus from the Last Supper because he’s reminding them that the bread and the cup and in fact the whole meal are not like other meals. The bread and cup in particular are the memorial of Christ’s death that inaugurated the New Covenant which the Church is to remember until Jesus returns.
Then Paul warns them about eating the bread and drinking the cup “in an unworthy manner.” And I don’t think this only means with a lack of reverence or with the wrong type of bread or wine or something. Paul tells them what an “unworthy manner” is in verse 29.
“For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.”
1 Corinthians 11:29 ESV
“For if you eat the bread or drink the cup without honoring the body of Christ, you are eating and drinking God’s judgment upon yourself.”
1 Corinthians 11:29 NLT
“For the one who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not properly recognize the body.”
1 Corinthians 11:29 NASB2020
Q: Who is the body of Christ?
A: The church.
Do we recognize, discern, and honor others as belonging to the body of Christ? Or is it all about ME?
Were the rich Corinthians treating their poor brothers in Christ like family or more like strangers? Were they honoring each other as members of Christ?
The poor arrive to the meeting and,
👩🏻🦱 “Oopsie. No bread or wine for you.”
That action says, “You don’t matter. It’s all about ME.” It could even suggest, “You aren’t part of the New Covenant.” And that’s something the Lord does not take lightly.
Remember the Krino family? Those are all the Greek words for judging. Paul picks that thread back up from chapters 2 and 6 and he introduces a new member of the Krino clan. Diakrino.
“But if we judged [diakrino] ourselves truly, we would not be judged [krino]. But when we are judged [krino] by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned [katakrino] along with the world.”
1 Corinthians 11:31-32 ESV
That good judgment we’re supposed to develop so we can one day judge the world and the angels? We can get practice by examining ourselves and discriminating between the log in our own eyes and the speck in our brother’s eye.
If a person can’t tell the difference between being a Christian and not being a Christian, there’s a good chance that he’s not a Christian. And he is in danger of being “condemned along with the world.”
If a person can’t tell the difference between a Christian brother and an unbeliever, that’s also a huge problem.
And these are issues that need a lot of discipleship. Paul has his work cut out for him. In the meantime, the Corinthians need some simple and clear instructions for their Agape Feast with Communion.
- Wait for each other.
- Sharing the covenant meal AS A FAMILY in self-giving love (just like Jesus’ self-giving love that led Him to lay down His life) is the whole point.
- If you’re famished, eat something at home so you can wait.
There is something so simple and bonding about a shared meal. On the few occasions where I have been able to share Communion with other brothers and sisters in the context of a normal meal – one at Red Lobster with cheddar biscuits comes to mind – I have found it to feel like the most natural and familial thing to do. And I think we need more of it.
