A STUDY OF FIRST CORINTHIANS

Chapter 11

Introduction: In this chapter, Paul will address certain problems with the Corinthian brethren that contributed to the blurring of societal distinctions between men and women. In addition, they failed to observe properly the Lord’s Supper. Paul reaffirms the method, meaning and purpose of observing the Lord’s Supper.

Verse 1.  This verse belongs with Paul’s thoughts in chapter 10. He concludes his argument by encouraging the brethren to follow his example in as much as he is following Christ.

God's Rank and File 

Verse 2. Paul is about to lay into the brethren for some of the abuses that took place in the congregation and among themselves. Before he does that he praises them for remembering him and for keeping the traditions that he delivered unto them. “Tradition” in this passage means something that is handed over or handed down. Remember, Paul handed down or delivered, what was first handed down or delivered unto him (1 Cor. 15:3). The tradition was not something that began with him. This passage is in stark contrast with verse 17. “Now I praise you . . . now . . . I do not praise you.”

Verse 3. Paul expresses the divine order of things in the universe. Christ is over all of mankind (Eph. 1:20-23). All things are put under His charge (1 Cor. 15:27). Just as Christ is the head of man, man is the head of woman. Christ is the head of every man, Christian or not and man is the head of woman, married or not. This is God’s intention for a civil society. At no time should a woman exercise authority over a man (1 Tim. 2:12). The woman who refuses to accept this divine decree is as guilty as an unbeliever who does not accept the authority of Christ. She is in rebellion to God when she tries to undermine God’s divine regulations. The feminist movement is in rebellion to God. Those who would consciously support such is in rebellion to God. Christ is subject to God (the Father). This is expressive of rank and does not speak to Jesus’ divinity (1 Cor. 15:27-28; 3:23; Phi. 2:5-11).

Verse 4. There is general disagreement over whether praying and prophesying is that which is inspired or regular prayers and inspired prophecy. Also there is uncertainty as to whether “his head” refers to the man’s physical hear or Christ as his head. Verse 5 can go either way, as well. In verse 4, Paul is talking about a literal covering. A man covering his head while praying or prophesying brings dishonor, either to himself or to Christ.

Verse 5. First, at that time in Corinth, whatever a man could do with his head uncovered, the woman could do with her head covered. The women are those who prayed and prophesied rather than those who were hearing someone pray and prophesy. I believe that this involves something outside of the assembly of the church. Paul does not deal with the assembly until verse 17. In addition, this verse would contradict the prohibition given in 14:34. Second, does the woman violate her head or the man? Either way, to go without the covering is as if she had a shaven head. We must view this purely from custom. In Greek culture, a woman shaven indicated a sense of disgrace. That same culture considered it immodest for a woman to have her head unveiled. The point that Paul is making here is that Christians need to be careful to observe the social customs of their day. I believe this point fits well with that which Paul made in 10:32-33.

Verse 6. If a woman is going to violate the terms of demonstrating her subjection in that particular culture, then she might as well go all the way and shave her head. Since and uncovered head and a shorn head are equally shameful in Corinth the woman should simply cover her head.

Verse 7-9. Both man and woman were made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27). However, only the man is the glory of God. God gave him dominion over all the earth and ultimately his wife due to her part in the fall (Gen. 3:16). Only when men fill their God given roles are they God’s glory. Any man, who does not love, honor, protect, praise, cherish and understand his wife, is less than a man and brings no glory to God. At the same time, the woman is the glory of man (Pro. 12:4). Any woman that does not conduct herself in a manner that is becoming a woman of excellence brings shame to her head (husband). She must exemplify that which Peter says in 1 Peter 3:1-6. There is nothing more destructive to a man’s reputation than to have a wife, who is in charge, is a gossip and busybody, whose public conduct is unseemly. Paul uses verse 8-9 to explain verse 7. Paul argues that the woman’s subjection to man is seen in her very creation. Her existence is totally dependent upon the man. She was made from the man. Without him, she would not exist. Also, if man did not need a helpmate, she would never have been created. Thus, she is dependent upon him, and is to be in subjection to him. God did not create her for independence.

Verse 10-12. This is a troublesome verse. Because of what Paul previously said, a woman, as a matter of moral obligation, must have a symbol of authority upon her head. However, what is “Authority” in this passage? The veil authorizes the woman to pray or prophesy in public. “Because of the angels” I believe is inserted by Paul as a reminder of what happened to those angels that left the place that God had assigned to them (Jude 6). A Woman must be careful never to refuse her place or leave the place in society that God has assigned to her. Since the creation, man now owes his existence to the woman. They do not live independently of each other. Just as the woman could not exist alone, man cannot either. Men should never think themselves, better, smarter or more important than women. They do not have that right. Subjection does not imply inferiority. Jesus is subject to the Father, not inferior to Him.  “In the Lord” refers to the divine arrangement. Man must remember that, although woman came from his rib, God who made her. Man must function within the framework of God’s design.       

Verses 13-15. Paul calls upon the brethren to judge for themselves such things. He appeals to nature as a teacher that God has distinguished men from women. The head covering is in keeping with the natural covering that God has given women in their long hair.  

Verse 16. The point of contention in this case would be the use of the head covering. The custom to which Paul refers is the use of the head covering. The use of the head covering was not universal in all of the congregations. This was a custom unique only to Corinth. Consider the fact that no other New Testament book deals with this issue.

Concerning the Lord's Supper 

Verse 17. “This” refers to what Paul is about to mention in verses 17-34. In contrast to verse 2, Paul now offers the brethren no praise. Their coming together did not serve its intended purpose (14:26). Thus, their assembling caused more harm then good.

Verse 18. Paul gives reasons why their assembling was harmful. First, they were abusing the Lord’s Supper. Second, they were abusing the spiritual gifts (to be discussed in chapters 12-14). They came together for the specific purpose of worship. The manner in which they conducted themselves resulted in divisions among themselves. This would cause any church great harm. Such is not according to the will of Christ (John 17:21) and the Holy Spirit (Eph. 4:1-3). The reports on the matters of division were probably a bit exaggerated. Nonetheless, he did not take the reports too lightly.

Verse 19. Of necessity, division had arisen in Corinth. Paul implies that there was a higher purpose in such division. The congregation appeared to be dividing into groups or classes. In this instance it is probably the rich and poor. Such division would help to make known those who are approved by God. This would manifest itself in the deportment of those who are not a party to such division. Jesus taught that such would be the case in the church (Matt. 13:47-50).

Verse 20. In the context of eating the Lord’s Supper, we need to observe that such was a congregational matter done by the members in a common geographical location. This verse in conjunction with Acts 20:7 indicates that the man purpose for the saints coming together on the Lord’s Day was to eat the Lord’s Supper. Under these conditions, the Corinthians could not possibly observe the Lord’s Supper in the right manner.

Verse 21. This verse highlights the division that was taking place at this time in Corinth. Those who had means partook of a common meal, while those who had not watched with hungry stomachs. In partaking of this common meal, those that had abundance ate without waiting for their poorer brethren. Some had even gotten drunk (a common occurrence within the Dionysus cult. Some Corinthians were allowing their former heathen practices to influence their worship (1 Cor. 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12). Such activities made eating the Lord’s Supper impossible.

Verse 22. Evidently, the place of worship was separate from the house. Using a rhetorical question, Paul commands the Corinthians to satisfy their hunger at home. The place of assembly was not a place for dining nor was the assembly called for such a purpose. It was not enough that some of the Corinthians were not acting brotherly to the less fortunate in the church; they had no authority to eat such a meal in the place of assembly. They brought shame to the assembly and demonstrated their contempt for it. They also shamed those who had nothing. Paul was very disappointed in them for this.

Verse 23. Paul reminds the Corinthians of the proper observance of the supper. What he delivered unto them was the very message that the Lord gave to him. The Corinthians had no room to add or take away from the Lord’s revelation concerning this observance. Paul refers to the historical facts as they unfolded pertaining to the institution of the Lord’s Supper. While men were plotting His death, Jesus instituted the very supper that would commemorate that death. On that night, Jesus took the bread that would have been there from the Passover (Luke 22:14-20). The significance is that the bread would have been unleavened (Exo. 12:8-15). In the New Testament authorizes no other kind of bread.

Verse 24. The manner in which Jesus instituted and He and His disciples observed the supper is the manner in which Paul described to the Corinthians. We must observe the supper in the same manner. Jesus took the bread, gave thanks for it, broke it and distributed to his disciples. Jesus, while he was very much alive, told His disciples that the bread was His body. Obviously, His disciples knew He was not talking about his literal body. Although Jesus literal body was given sacrificially, the disciples did not eat the actual body of Jesus, nor do they today. Jesus commanded that His disciples observe this feast in the prescribed manner. “This do” makes the supper an act of obedience. The supper served as a tool of provoking the memory of Christians much like the Passover did the Jews. Jesus must be the object of our Lord’s Day worship. With such an observance, it would be hard to forget what Jesus had done on our behalf.

Verse 25. In the same manner, Jesus took the cup. That is, Jesus gave thanks for the cup, gave it to them and they drank (Matt. 26:27). According to Luke’s account the cup was given to the disciples after the Passover meal (Luke 22:17, 20). The blood of Jesus is a reference not just to what poured from his veins, but also the life that He gave. Jesus shed His blood and gave His life to effect the new covenant (Heb. 9:15-17). Jesus declared the coming new covenant in keeping with the prophecy of Jeremiah 31:31-34. The covenant was not new in time, but in quality (KAINOS). The New covenant was “in My blood” Jesus said. That is, when Jesus blood was shed (gave His life) the new covenant came in force (Exo. 24:8). The disciples of Jesus were to observe this feast regularly. They met each first day of the week to observe this (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:1-2).

Verse 26. Every time that the disciples observe the Lord’s Supper, the disciples of the Lord make a proclamation. First, they proclaim the death of Jesus. They recognize and believe in all that Jesus came to do. Second, they proclaim that Jesus has risen from the dead in that they hope and wait for His return. They are to observe this supper until Jesus comes again. Saints today look back to the death of Jesus and at the same time look forward to His return, when they observe the Lord’s Supper. Another point that we should observe from this passage is that the disciples were to take both the bread and the fruit of the vine. The cup represents the contents, which is the juice of the grape. Jewish Law forbade drinking wine undiluted. The juice, according to Luke’s account appears to have been divided before the disciples drank it. The cup does not refer to the container but the contents (Mark 10:38-39). Some believe that we should be drinking from only one cup and not from multiple cups.

Self Examination of Worth 

Verse 27. Many Christians have misunderstood this passage to mean that any person, who is not worthy to partake of the Lord’s Supper, should refrain. The word translated “wherefore” connects this verse to what Paul had previously taught concerning the Supper. One would think that a person who feels unworthy before the supper would take the time to get right before the supper is passed. Paul intends to teach here that anyone who eats the supper improperly or carelessly is guilty of both the body and blood of the Lord. This is true whether a person eats the bread properly and the fruit of the vine improperly or vice versa.

Verses 28-29. Each person is to examine himself. No one else can examine another’s heart. I believe the examination is intended to determine whether one is in the right frame of mind to eat. Once he has settled in his mind a proper examination, then he can eat and drink. This self-examination helps to prevent a person from inviting God’s judgment upon him. This he does when he has failed to achieve the right frame of mind. Each person must be minded to think upon the purpose for which he has gathered, and the reason for which he is partaking. The Supper is a memorial of the death of Jesus. We must judge correctly the elements as those, which are emblematic of Christ’s shed blood and torn body. To treat the Supper with the dignity of a common meal is outrageous.

Verses 30-32. Paul gives the consequences of failing to examine one’s self properly: weakness, sickness, and death. Several hold the position that God’s judgment in this case is physical. I believe it is spiritual. Sin may not always immediately follow with physical death. However, all sin of which there has been no repentance will result in spiritual weakness, sickness and death (Eze. 18:4; Rom. 6:23). Furthermore, Paul says that a person, who would have judged himself properly, would have escaped God’s judgment. Yet, although many do properly discern, they may still become physically weak, sick and die. Thus, there can be no doubt that Paul is referring to the spiritual. Paul gives one more indication that this is not referring to physical judgment in verse 32. The purpose for God’s judgment is to bring His people to repentance and escape the ultimate condemnation. It is hard to repent when you are dead.

Verse 33. Because the Corinthians did not have clocks, they had to have in place a method of determining the amount of time to wait. Yet, they were to wait. This they had not been doing along with treating the supper as a common mean and divided the rich from the poor. Today, our method of waiting is the clock. We determine the time when the church would assemble to partake of the supper. If no one shows up at the times when the supper was made available, he cannot eat.

Verse 34. To come together in the context of the church to eat a common meal was to invite God’s judgment. Paul is not saying that the only place you can eat is at home. He was simply saying, “Do not eat in the assembly.” The church has a specific purpose and is charged to do specific things. Accommodating the eating of common meals is not the purpose of the church. Such is without any authority in the Scriptures. They may have been some other abuses that Paul would deal with when he visited those brethren.