1 Corinthians 11

Thursday, 20 November 2014

…and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 1 Corinthians 11:24

Paul continues with words of instruction concerning the Lord’s Supper which he received from the Lord. On the night of His betrayal, He took bread and then gave thanks over it. A common form of thanks at such a time as this would have been –

“Blessed art Thou, O Lord our God, King of the Universe, who brings forth bread from the earth.”

This then is a picture of the coming resurrection of Christ. Though the Bread of Life would be laid in the tomb, He would come forth from the earth in victory. The term “had given thanks” is the Greek word eucharistesas, from which we derive the term Eucharist. Thus this is often called such. After the Eurcharist, “He broke it.” Bengel comments on this,

“The very mention of the breaking involves distribution and refutes the Corinthian plan – every man his own.”

In other words, he is showing that the breaking of the bread implies parceling it out to all attendees. This is set in contrast to the improper attitude mentioned in 1 Corinthians 11:21 which said, “For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk.”

Next, after breaking the bread, the Lord instructed them to “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you.” If nothing else (and there is more, but not as biblically explicit), these words show that the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation is not only wrong, it isn’t even well thought out. This teaching says that the elements given by the priests of the Roman Catholic Church literally become the body and blood of the Lord Jesus. In essence, one is literally eating His flesh each time that they take of the Communion. This is also similar to the doctrine of the Lutheran Church which teaches consubstantiation. It is similar to, but not quite the same as, the Roman Catholic teaching.

In refutation of this, Benson wisely notes the following –

“As the clause, which is broken, cannot be taken literally, because it would imply that Christ’s body was broken, or put to death on the cross, at the time he said this, contrary to truth; so the clause, this is my body, cannot be taken literally: for the two clauses making but one proposition, if the clause, this is my body, which is the subject of the proposition, be interpreted literally, the predicate, which is broken for you, must be so likewise. Consequently the proposition will import, that the bread in our Lord’s hands was converted into a thing which at that time had no existence.”

Said differently, if the bread is literally His body, then how could he hold it in His hands and say “This is My body?” Likewise, in breaking it, His own body would have then been broken at that time. Neither was the case. Rather, He was showing that the elements are symbolic representations of His body and blood, not the actual elements.

In closing this portion of the instruction, Paul finishes with, “do this in remembrance of Me.” The word “do” is poieie. It means “be doing” or “continue doing.” It is to be a common, continual practice when the church comes together. There is nothing wrong, and everything right, with continuing in this practice at every gathering. After all, it is in remembrance of the Lord Jesus which is the very purpose of gathering together in the first place.

Life application: The Lord’s Supper is a symbolic remembrance of the work of the Lord. Be sure to participate in it as often as your church holds it. And if they don’t hold it often, then show them the words of the Lord. What is frequently treated as an inconvenient side issue is actually the heart of where our faith and practice should lie.

Heavenly Father, I want to thank You today for the greatest Gift of all. It is what all of Scripture points to and it is the highlight of all ages. Thank You for the giving of Your Son in order to redeem us. Thank You for His perfection, His merciful kindness, and His grace towards us. Thank You for His atoning sacrifice at the cross of Calvary. And thank You God that He was found faithful in His work and sinless in His being. Death could not hold Him and He arose. Praise You, O God! He arose! Thank You for the resurrection which guarantees that I will rise as well. Hallelujah and Amen!

Wednesday, 19 November 2014

For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; 1 Corinthians 11:23

Because of the error of the gatherers at the observance of the Lord’s Supper, Paul now takes time to spell out the solemnity which the occasion deserves. And so he begins with, “For I received from the Lord.” This means with all certainty that Paul was told directly from the risen Christ about the events of the night before His crucifixion. This very well may have occurred while he was in Arabia (see Galatians 1:17) during a time of personal instruction because of his calling and commission as “the Apostle to the Gentiles.” The fact that the “I” is emphatic and singular shows that this was not passed to him by another, but by Christ Himself.

“That which I also delivered to you” indicates that he had already instructed the Corinthians on this matter when he was present with them. The letter he received told him that his words were not acted upon, and so the letter includes this instruction to be maintained as proper doctrine. If followed, error wouldn’t creep in again as it had. Unfortunately, even though we have the letter included in the Bible, error still creeps into this most solemn ceremony. However, correction is available by merely opening the Bible and reading it. How sad it is that this simple procedure is so enormously neglected or mishandled!

“That the Lord Jesus” is given to show believers that the ordinance was instituted by the Lord Himself. Further, it is exclusively of the Lord. He didn’t ask one of the disciples to conduct the affair for Him. Rather, the entire ordinance is of Him.

“On the same night in which He was betrayed” is an account which is recorded in various ways in the four gospels. However, the description which most closely follows Paul’s words here is that of Luke 22. With only a few minor variations, they match exactly. The only real differences are that Luke says “given for you” while Paul leaves out “given.” Also Luke omits, “This do, as often as you drink it ” after the giving of the cup. Despite this, they are implied in his words “in the same manner” during the giving of the bread.

Finally, it says He “took bread.” This was at the time of the Passover. In the law, the Passover requirements say this –

“In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall eat unleavened bread, until the twenty-first day of the month at evening. ¹⁹ For seven days no leaven shall be found in your houses, since whoever eats what is leavened, that same person shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he is a stranger or a native of the land. ²⁰ You shall eat nothing leavened; in all your dwellings you shall eat unleavened bread.” Exodus 12:18-20

The bread which was consumed at the Passover was unleavened; it had no yeast. In the Bible, yeast pictures sin. Just as leaven makes bread rise, so sin puffs up an individual. The bread itself was a picture of the sinless Bread of Life, Christ. Because of this, it is proper to present unleavened bread at the observance of the Lord’s Supper. This is not a legalistic addition to the rite, but rather it is what is proper and honoring to Christ. To use a common loaf of bread is to abuse the very picture which is being made in the ceremony.

Life application: Traditions are often one of the worst cancers in a church body. When a tradition is introduced and is elevated to the level of Scripture, then only a degradation of the sanctity of Scripture can occur. However, if a tradition finds its roots in Scripture, it is proper and honoring of God – who gave Scripture, that we follow through with the tradition. How much more important then is proper adherence to the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper! It is a tradition which is actually mandated by the Lord Himself.

How sweet and pleasant it is to come, O Lord, to Your table
To share in communion with You in the bread and cup
Yes, I will participate as often as I am able
And to have a time of reflection before we sup

I will think on You, my Lord, who died on that tree
I will think on the cross, where my sin was washed away
I will ponder the relation between You and me
And I will call to remembrance Your work; the price You did pay

Glory to You Lord, how You care for the sons of men
We will continue to fellowship at this table until You come again

Lord God Almighty, wondrous are Your ways and splendid are Your deeds. From Your hand came all things and to You they belong. Thank You for the life You have blessed us with. Thank You for the freedom to choose the path we take. And thank You for Jesus who washes away the error that comes as we walk on that path. Through Him, I praise You, now and forever! Amen.

Tuesday, 18 November 2014

What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I do not praise you. 1 Corinthians 11:22

This verse, coupled with the previous verse, is intended as one very strong rebuke of this particular practice of the Corinthians. They were meeting at their observance in a way which disregarded the holy nature of the meal. In his astonishment at their conduct towards one another, he says “What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in?” In other words, “If you want to engage in a feast, isn’t that a better place to do it? Why would you bring food to this gathering and then sit and gobble it up in front of those you are supposed to be fellowshipping with?”

This then leads to the next obvious thought, “Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing?” The intent of the gathering was first and foremost to remember the work of the Lord. Secondly, if there was to be a meal, it was intended that those with much should bring something along for those who had little or nothing. These poorer brethren probably didn’t even have their own homes, making the contrast all the more poignant. But instead of sharing, people would sit down and eat and drink what they had brought. If this was the attitude, then they should just stay home and eat and drink.

Based on this, his obvious questioning comes forth – “What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I do not praise you.” Their actions could not be condoned. Christ came to serve others and left the example for us to follow. This concept of serving and sharing was lost during their feasts and left Paul with no choice but to write his words of correction concerning the matter.

As a side issue which is necessary for proper doctrine on an important topic, it should be noted in this verse that Paul never rebukes the gatherers for the notion that “another is drunk” which he stated in the previous verse. In other words, the fact that they had consumed alcohol isn’t even addressed. Instead, he tells them to simply eat and drink at home if they were to handle the other issue (that of over-indulging at the expense of others) in an inappropriate manner. If one were to find fault in this verse for drinking alcohol (as many scholars attempt to do) then they must also find fault for them eating food as well, which would be ludicrous.

The subject of drinking has divided many churches. However, if it is looked at from an objective viewpoint, there can be only one obvious conclusion as to whether it is acceptable or not. Unfortunately, personal passions about subjects such as this inevitably lead to false interpretations of Scripture.

Life application: Whatever you do, do it to the glory of God and without harming others in the process.

Lord, who am I to decide matters of faith and religion? Certainly I am not the one for such things. But You are! And You have given Your word for this very reason. In standing on Your word, it is You who are the ultimate Judge. And so, with all confidence in what is right and holy, I can make sound decisions about the all-important issues which affect a right relationship with You. Thank You for Your word which allows this certainty. Amen.

Monday, 17 November

For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk. 1 Corinthians 11:21

In the previous verse, it was noted that when they came together, it wasn’t in the manner of the Lord’s Supper (literally – “it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper.”) Paul now explains why this is so. In evaluating it, all we need to do is think of a modern “potluck supper.”

“For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others.” Instead of bringing along the food and leaving it for all to share in (which is what the known customs of the time reveal) the people would get right into the food they brought, thus there wasn’t a fellowship in the meal, but rather a sense of greediness in it. People were just diving in to make sure they got a full belly, regardless of what others received.

Because of this, the result was that “one is hungry and another is drunk.” The contrasts are obvious. One person who may have been poor and couldn’t bring much was left with an empty stomach; the other who got right into the meal overindulged and got “drunk.” As hunger implies deprivation and as drunkenness implies over-indulgence, the two are noted to highlight the situation. Because there was a lack of fellowship and sharing, it thus could not be the Lord’s Supper of which they partook. Rather, it was a feast of self-interest, not humble remembrance.

A final point on this verse is that the word “drunk” is the Greek word methuó. It means exactly as translated, “drunk.” In an honest evaluation of the passage, it can be taken in no other way. Although highly unpalatable to many, the obvious conclusion to be made is that the gatherings of the early church included alcohol. Whether this was acceptable or not will be realized in verse 22. The conclusion is obvious from the text itself.

Life application: It is proper to objectively evaluate issues found in the Bible without inserting presuppositions about the matter at hand. In other words, we are to “let the chips fall where they may.” Only then can we be considered to properly handle and rightly divide the word of God.

Lord, I love You. Who else would step down from an instrument of torture and death and say to the person who put Him there, “It’s ok, I did it for you.” Who else would be willing to carry away my evil heart, my wicked deeds, and my faithless life in this way? How great You are. Lord, I love You. Amen.

Sunday, 16 November 2014

Therefore when you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper. 1 Corinthians 11:20

This verse leads to all kinds of theories and speculations about the taking of the Lord’s Supper. It also leads to ideas which really miss the point. An example of this is that the term “supper” indicates an evening meal, which is when Christ shared the elements of the commemoration. Therefore, some have claimed that the evening is the proper time to participate in the memorial. The point of coming together for it, however, isn’t one of “time of day” but rather in remembrance of the work of the Lord.

To insist on commemorating the ordinance in the evening adds in a level of legalism which is unnecessary. Paul’s point in this discussion, like the previous issue concerning head coverings, is that of propriety of conduct. In verse 18, he noted the divisions which he had been informed of. Then in verse 19 he gave the seemingly unrelated note that “there must also be factions among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you.” This isn’t unrelated, but the explanation won’t be fully realized until later in the discussion. “Who are approved” are those who are acting properly. If they are “recognized among you” then the opposite would be true, and those who weren’t approved would be known for their improper actions.

But for now, Paul begins with “therefore” to show that he is building upon what he said. It is tied to the “factions” he mentioned along with the actions of the people within the factions. Because of these things, he notes that “when you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper.” Instead of what they should be demonstrating, a united group who are there to remember the work of the Lord and to commemorate it, there is disharmony. This will be seen in the coming verses.

Life application: The ultimate aim of church meetings isn’t to satisfy oneself. Nor should there be divisions over matters in order for some to attempt to be exalted in the eyes of others. Rather, the aim of gatherings it to exalt and glorify the Lord. Anytime a gathering occurs that isn’t directed toward that goal, something else will inevitably fill the void and it will lead to disharmony, not unity.

Lord, as I go to church to worship You, help me to remember that I’m going to church to worship You! I don’t want to lose sight of the very thing which calls us together as a congregation. And so in praise, in prayer, in listening to the preacher, and in any other thing we do, keep me remembering that it is all about You. I know that with this in my heart, You will be well-pleased. Amen.